Wil je een videoclip bekijken en stoort het X-files-deuntje jou daarbij. Schakel het deuntje gewoon uit door in deze kolon, helemaal beneden op de 2 witte balkjes in het blauwe cirkeltje te klikken, tot een pijltje verschijnt. Veel kijk- en luisterplezier en bedankt voor jouw bezoek.
The purpose of this blog is the creation of an open, international, independent and free forum, where every UFO-researcher can publish the results of his/her research. The languagues, used for this blog, are Dutch, English and French.You can find the articles of a collegue by selecting his category. Each author stays resposable for the continue of his articles. As blogmaster I have the right to refuse an addition or an article, when it attacks other collegues or UFO-groupes.
Deze blog is opgedragen aan mijn overleden echtgenote Lucienne.
In 2012 verloor ze haar moedige strijd tegen kanker!
In 2011 startte ik deze blog, omdat ik niet mocht stoppen met mijn UFO-onderzoek.
UFO'S - MET HET LAATSTE NIEUWS OVER UFO'S BOVEN BELGIË EN IN ANDERE LANDEN...
UFO's in België en de rest van de wereld In België heb je vooral BUFON of het Belgisch UFO-Netwerk, dat zich met UFO's bezighoudt. BEZOEK DUS ZEKER VOOR ALLE OBJECTIEVE INFORMATIE ww.ufo.be.
Verder heb je ook het Belgisch-Ufo-meldpunt en Caelestia, die prachtig, doch ZEER kritisch werk leveren, ja soms zelfs héél sceptisch...
Voor Nederland kan je de mooie site www.ufowijzer.nl bezoeken van Paul Harmans. Een mooie site met veel informatie en artikels.
MUFON of het Mutual UFO Network Inc is een Amerikaanse UFO-vereniging met afdelingen in alle USA-staten en diverse landen.
MUFON's mission is the analytical and scientific investigation of the UFO- Phenomenon for the benefit of humanity...
Je kan ook hun site bekijken onder www.mufon.com.
Ze geven een maandeliiks tijdschrift uit, namelijk The MUFON UFO-Journal. Since 02/01/2013 is Pieter not only president (=voorzitter) of BUFON, but also National Director MUFON / Flanders and the Netherlands. We work together with the French MUFON Reseau MUFON/EUROP.
British astrophysicist Andrew Pike seemingly postulates in his 700+-page new book ‘The Rendlesham File: Britain’s Roswell?’ that the late December, 1980 Unexplained events in the Rendlesham Forest area were most likely attributable to such rare natural phenomena as plasma or ball lightning and secret microwave technology experiments, possibly involving secret military microwave-powered UAVs or drones, stealthy and triangular in shape.
In that case, I assume, there should be existing classified documentation someplace pertaining to the details (the preparatory measures and the after-evaluation) of this secret test operation. I assume some high-level individuals at the base were briefed on these experiments beforehand and were told to keep quiet? The (deliberate) disinformation campaign set up since then — as raised by retired US Air Force Col. Charles Halt (who was the former deputy base commander and firsthand witness) on the Paracast of May 26, 2013, referring to that effect to the lighthouse stuff, Larry Warren, Jim Penniston, John Burroughs and a fake colonel Wilson — has been part of a continuing effort to keep this microwave experimentation story from leaking out? In what context are we to see the late ex-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s reply to the late UFO researcher Georgina Bruni: “You must have the facts and you can’t tell the people”?
Why at such an important nuclear-armed base at the height of the cold war? Wouldn’t it be safer to perform or test such exotic experimental technology at remote locations specifically built for such purposes, like Area 51, far away from prying eyes? And why are these specific experiments still under wraps considering we are dealing here with 37-year-old technology? I assume (classified) stealth and UAV technology has greatly progressed since then, and “old" stealth and UAV technology developed over the past several decades have been unclassified and are known now, which I believe can also be applied to “old" microwave-powered or beam-powered propulsion technologies. So what makes this alleged microwave operation which supposedly took place at that base so special then that it cannot be disclosed, 37 years after the facts?
Andrew Pike's postulation tallies with the conclusions presented in the 2006 publicly released 400+-page report of the Ministry of Defence’s three-year secret study, codenamed Project Condign. The report (whose author is still unknown) basically states that it is an indisputable fact that UFOs or UAPs exist, but there is no evidence they have an extraterrestrial source, and within that context references are made to "natural, but relatively rare phenomena” such as ball lightning and atmospheric plasmas as likely explanations for some UAP events. The report also commented on the Rendlesham case: “The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation for longer than normal UAP sighting periods. There may be other cases which remain unreported. It is clear that the recipients of these effects are not aware that their behaviour/perception of what they are observing is being modified.”
Pike’s position also corresponds with the late arch-skeptic Philip Klass’ assertions which Klass wrote down in his 1968 290-page book ‘UFOs — Identified’. In this book, he advances the hypothesis that some UFOs are generated by atmospheric phenomena such as ball lightning or plasma caused by nearby electrical power lines. However, he candidly admits that "The plasma theory encounters some difficulty in explaining the very loud roar which Zamora said he heard over the sound of his speeding car," although he added, "UFOs are almost invariably described as being noiseless.” Speaking about the April 24, 1964 Lonnie Zamora case, I have noticed that UFO researcher Kevin Randle has recently published a new 288-page book about that fascinating case, ‘Encounter in the Desert: The Case for Alien Contact at Socorro’
The late 1960s remind me of the 1969 publicly released 900+-page 'Final Report of the Scientific Study Of Unidentified Flying Objects' (also known as 'The Condon Report’), a two-year study which was conducted by the University of Colorado under contract to the United States Air Force. Like its British counterpart Project Condign in 2000, this US study basically came to the same conclusion in 1968, i.e. "the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings is the least likely explanation of UFOs”, meaning that they are most likely of conventional origin. I’m not quite sure how this study evaluated such little understood phenomena as plasma or ball lightning as likely causes for UFOs back then. However, within the context of its conclusion, I assume the research team also considered or delved into these areas. As most of you know, the study’s director, Dr. Edward Condon, was very dismissive in his conclusions towards UFOs as being of exotic origin or something of extreme value which could advance scientific knowledge. This report has therefore acted as the Holy Bible for non-believers, while the study itself is actually very acceptive of a truly unexplained UFO phenomenon deserving further scientific study, if one carefully considers or reviews its data. As retired nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman remarks in his 2008 book ‘Flying Saucers and Science (p. 53): “It comes as a great surprise to many that, according to a UFO subcommittee of the world’s largest group of space scientists — the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics — one could come to the opposite conclusions as Dr. Condon based on the data in the report. Any phenomena with 30 percent unidentified classifications is certainly worth further investigation, as the AIAA noted."
Art Campbell’s wife informed me yesterday that her beloved husband passed away on October 28. This sad news really came as a surprise to me. I sent her my deepest condolences on her loss.
My email exchanges with Art Campbell have always been very amicable in nature and I’ll always be very grateful to him for the free documentation he has sent me over the years pertaining to UFOs, in particular to his long research re the alleged July, 1947 UFO crash at The Plains of San Augustin and the associated metallurgical analyses of wreckage which was found at the site. For those of you who didn’t know him, I’ve included a link to his website.
This link to a January 1, 1968 John Keel letter http://www.johnkeel.com/?p=1449 as well as this one referring to John Keel's article "The Flying Saucer Subculture" https://www.scribd.com/.../The-Flyi... recently posted on social media with the following statement: "John Keel considered himself a Fortean, not a ufologist. Mark Pilkington dedicated Mirage Men to Keel and said that he "was first and foremost a story-teller," and his work "knowingly blurs the lines between fiction and non-fiction... Keel charged his ideas with the power of myth and so ensured their continued survival long beyond his own lifetime.” In this video from a 1992 Fortean lecture (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOY...), Keel discussed UFOs as being living energy (that sometimes burn witnesses), their hallucinatory nature, and their causing dogs to bark.”
The individual who posted the John Keel open letter finds it a good one and according to another individual this letter still rings true to this day. John Keel’s "The Flying Saucer Subculture" was even described as "an unflinching history of the first two decades of ufology and Essential reading”. As you will see below, I have also included a 2002 article from noted UFO researcher and historian Jerome Clark re the late John Keel as a counterbalance. Stanton Friedman informed me in his May 29, 1998 letter (I didn't have a computer back then) that "John Keel has made so many false claims I can't count them.” And as the late James McDonald observed about Keel, as can be read in Jerry Clark's piece John Keel vs UFOlogy: “you’re not in a particularly strong position to criticize someone like myself for speculating on the UFO problem. I might tick off, but won’t take time to, a pretty long list of your own speculations that are not well supported in your writings. As a matter of fact, it is not your own speculations that I find disquieting, but your practiced style of writing as if you had some deep insights into baffling mysteries that no one else has plumbed. "I simply do not understand you. You just spin one mystery inside another and never get anything across in any concrete terms.”
In the second paragraph of John Keel's article "The Flying Saucer Subculture”, it reads: “An unidentified flying object,” according to Dr. Edward U. Condon’s definition, is “the stimulus for a report made byone or more individuals of something seen in the sky (or anobject thought to be capable of flight but seen when landed on the earth) which the observer could not identify as having anordinary natural origin ..." This observation is flat-out wrong because Hynek said that a sighting report should not become a "UFO" until it has been screened for IFO type conventional explanations by scientifically competent personnel. He severely criticized Condon's definition of a UFO as merely whatever a witness says he/she can't identify, and said that an expert must make that evaluation.
In the thread where these links were posted, Stanton Friedman was described as a “professional UFO lecturer”, a "UFO Superstar” or a “promotor” of false claims like the Marjorie Fish star map, the MJ-12 documents and the Aztec UFO crash hoax "repeating the same false claims in his lectures for decades” and "whose material is stale and tiresome”. My reaction to such accusations has always been that these individuals should debate Stanton Friedman — I even give them his contact address — and present these false claims to him, instead of writing all kinds of silly comments on social media unbeknownst to Friedman. Perhaps they already know they wouldn’t stand a chance when debating Friedman, which reminds me of amateur astronomer and debunker James McGaha who engaged in a two-hour debate with Stanton Friedman at Middle Tennessee State University on January 24, 2004. Friedman won hands down, because he had the relevant facts in hand whereas James McGaha put his mouth in gear without presenting any evidence.
It has been my personal observation that there seems to be so much undeserved hostility towards researchers like Friedman who has been viciously attacked and accused of doggedly standing behind his ETH conclusions for some UFO cases, while there seems to be overly blind acceptance and friendliness towards researchers à la John Keel and James W. Moseley disseminating obscurantism and unreliable, vague and perpetual story-telling and trickery. It's really astonishing to observe that some individuals on social media, notably at UFO Updates’ Facebook page, seemingly prefer to choose the Glenn Becks and the Clowns of UFOlogy or the Fast Writers among UFOlogists with the weirdest mystical ideas about the nature and origin of UFOs — as long as it isn’t a "nuts and bolt" ET - over reliable and clear-headed researchers who have made straightforward observations based on years of personal investigations or based on their knowledge of specific (scientific) areas like e.g. Stanton Friedman and other intelligent, meticulous individuals I know but whom I won’t mention here. Of course, the latter researchers can be wrong or make mistakes, but are they wrong or do they make mistakes all the time? That is a big difference! Any expert in whatever specialised area is subject to mistakes and such. If something is true based on the factual data or evidence gathered through personal investigations, does it become invalid simply by repeating it time after time in lectures? According to some it clearly does. To me, that is rather strange reasoning or logic. Perhaps one of the best tentative but straightforward conclusions made about UFOs, at least to me, is that of the late atmospheric physicist James E. McDonald: "On the basis of the evidence I have examined, and on the basis of my own weighing of alternative hypotheses, I now regard Hypothesis 7 [Extraterrestrial devices of some surveillance nature] as the one most likely to prove correct. My scientific instincts lead me to hedge that prediction just to the extent of suggesting that if the UFOs are not of extramundane origin, then I suspect that they will prove to be something very much more bizarre, something of perhaps even greater scientific interest than extraterrestrial devices” (Statement on Unidentified Flying Objects (p. 5), 1968).
As to the late James W. Moseley, noted UFO researcher and historian Jerry Clark wrote a critical review in 2002 of Moseley's "Shockingly Close to the Truth! Confessions of a Grave-Robbing Ufologist" which he co-wrote with the late Karl T. Pflock. Jerry Clark sent me this review "The Trivialist" many years ago. I still have it.
And as to Mark Pilkington and his Mirage Men, Stanton Friedman had sent me his review in 2015 about Pilkington’s poor “research”, which you will find enclosed. He had already sent me his column the year before. Friedman also informed me that those who had attended Pilkington’s lecture at the 2015 IUFOC know how many people left early who were totally unimpressed, adding that many thanked him afterwards for pointing out Pilkington's deficiencies at the end of his presentation.
So it wasn’t just me who thought the late and great John Keel made stuff up…..
JOHN KEEL vs UFOLOGY
by Jerome Clark
[published in Fortean Times 156 (2002), pp. 39-42]
On March 17, 1969, John A. Keel, occult journalist, composed a three-page letter to James E. McDonald, atmospheric physicist. Except for their mutual fascination with the UFO phenomenon and their outsized personalities, it would be difficult to imagine two men less alike. Between them they personified the extremes of 1960s ufology.
One addressing himself almost exclusively to radical ufologists and Forteans itching for an exciting alternative to the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) harked back to the 1940s, to Richard S. Shaver and N. Meade Layne, and, even earlier, to classical demonology and supernatural folk belief. The other allying himself with the most conservative ufologists and speaking to his fellow scientists and to elite institutions possessing the wherewithal to fund UFO research and to overcome entrenched resistance to the phenomenon sought to drag ufology out of its marginality and to transform it into a branch of normal science. Barely more than two years later, McDonald would be dead by his own hand, and Keel would live on to write The Mothman Prophecies and other books and to remain an active presence into the 1980s and an enduring influence even now.
It can be fairly said that if McDonald wanted to domesticate UFOs and place them in the mainstream, Keel preferred them so wild and woolly that the ETH would pale into banality by comparison. The whole structure of post-Enlightenment civilization itself would collapse before Keel’s shape-changing ultraterrestrials demons with a fancy new moniker became a generally recognized species. In Keel’s view, McDonald, an accomplished and (at least until he took up UFO advocacy) well-regarded member of the University of Arizona’s Institute of Atmospheric Physics, needed educating and not just about the supernatural reality underlying UFOs and allegedly related manifestations: poltergeists, fairies, Sasquatch, Republicans, in short just about anything else not immediately explainable. Keel, using a rhetorical technique that over the years would become wearily familiar, remarked that
“McDonald suffered from a regretable [sic] emotionalism & apparent in many of your public statements.”
Moreover, Keel observed, “You often tend to substitute speculation for facts.”
McDonald was associating with the wrong people, for example the ufologists associated with NICAP (National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, a relatively cautious, pro-ETH private group headed by UFO author and retired U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe). These sorts were buffs who adopted a conclusion before they had any evidence. Keel, on the other hand, drew on extensive field studies and personal experiences, not to mention the valid, independent studies he had conducted outside the buffery sphere of reference. Among other things, he had established conclusively that known poltergeist cases and known UFO waves correlate precisely with each other, thus substantiating Keel’s theory that the poltergeist phenomenon is a UFO effect.
Keel declared that his comprehensive study of all religious traditions proved divine miracles and UFO contacts also to be identical at their root. No specifics accompanied these assertions, though he did urge McDonald to look up recent Keel articles in such august journals as the pulp cheesecake-and-adventure magazine Male and Ray Palmer’s pulp hollow-earth-championing Flying Saucers. On the last of his three pages, he did mention West Virginia contactee Woodrow Derenberger. Highly qualified psychiatrists had given Derenberger a completely clean bill of health. Even more revealingly, one of the doctors involved experienced direct contact himself!
McDonald’s restrained response, written on March 24, observes mildly that
“you’re not in a particularly strong position to criticize someone like myself for speculating on the UFO problem. I might tick off, but won’t take time to, a pretty long list of your own speculations that are not well supported in your writings. As a matter of fact, it is not your own speculations that I find disquieting, but your practiced style of writing as if you had some deep insights into baffling mysteries that no one else has plumbed.”
Writing back with a long letter dated April 2, Keel portrayed himself as the one man who had broken through all the buffery myths and nonsense, conducted not just the field work but the statistical and scientific studies others (such as McDonald, who had only emotional involvement, or NICAP’s obsessive-compulsive paranoid schizophrenics ) had not even thought to try, and found a definite conclusion based upon hard facts.
“The UFOs are transmogrifications. The UFO entities are variations on the age-old elemental types.”
In a much shorter reply McDonald, refusing to rise to the bait, remarked that Keel simply was not making himself clear. When he talked about transmogrifications and age-old elemental phenomena, he wrote,
"I simply do not understand you. You just spin one mystery inside another and never get anything across in any concrete terms."
In a note to himself —McDonald was a compulsive note-taker— he said that he was disinclined to engage in further correspondence.
It was a wise decision. Keel had already declared that the celebrated scientific method has proven to be totally unworkable where UFO investigation and interpretation are concerned.[i] Those who have had access to McDonald’s massive UFO files (housed at the University of Arizona in Tucson) have seen abundant evidence of his commitment to the scientific method.[ii] McDonald, alas, merely a passive observer; could only interview witnesses, weigh testimony, study radar records, consider alternative explanations for sightings, and all the rest. Keel, on the other hand, could actually control UFO events. Once, he claimed, he had conjured up the notion of gillmen, and not long afterwards according to Keel anyway someone actually encountered a gillman. Who, where, or when Keel never let on.
If you believe John Keel, you also believe this: Supernatural gods (ultraterrestrials, hereafter UTs) once ruled directly over the earth but then returned to their abode, the superspectrum (the upper reaches of the electro-magnetic spectrum ), after human beings began to populate the planet. Displeased with the intrusion, the UTs engaged in protracted conflict with Homo sapiens in an effort to resolve this territorial dispute. (Keel does not explain why such presumably superior entities would have to wage the dispute over thousands of years.) The UTs also battled each other, and one group assumed human form so that it could more easily communicate with the Neanderthals, whom it sought to enlist in its physical army.
“The unintended result was sexual intercourse and the creation of the human race as we know it.[iii] This produced strange responses in the offsprings materialized nervous system,” Keel wrote. “Emotions were born. Frequencies were changed. The direct control of the superintelligence was driven from their bodies. They were trapped on Earth, unable to ascend the electromagnetic scale and reenter their etheric world. With the loss of control, they became animals, albeit highly intelligent animals.” [iv]
According to Keel, humanity’s long interaction with the supernatural, as well as the timely intervention of enigmatic, unearthly strangers in the lives of historical personages such as Thomas Jefferson and Malcolm X, testifies to the continuing presence of the gods of old, including God, who dwell in the superspectrum. Its manifestations include UFOs and their occupants, monsters, demons, angels, poltergeists, ghosts, and voices in the head.
The Mothman Prophecies by John Keel
“The Devil’s emissaries of yesterday have been replaced by the mysterious men in black,” he stated. “The quasi-angels of Biblical times have become magnificent spacemen. The demons, devils, and false angels were recognized as liars and plunderers by early man. The same impostors now appear as long-haired Venusians.” [v]
“Thus you swallow all but the benign slant of testimony from such notorious characters as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Aladino Felix (aka Dino Kraspedon), and Ernest Arthur Bryant (of the notorious Scoriton episode, in which a reincarnated Adamski returned via spacecraft to rural Devonshire), all contactees of the 1950s and 1960s, all of them with at least to other observers – very serious, some might say fatal, credibility problems.[vi]And then there’s the already-mentioned Woodrow Derenberger and, on the other side of him, Thomas F. Monteleone.”
From November 1966 until he dropped out of sight a few years later, Derenberger, a late-middle-aged sewing-machine salesman, challenged the credulity of even the most slack-jawed with ever more expansive fables of interactions with space people and of jaunts to their home planet, Lanulos ( near the Ganymede star cluster [vii]). Given conservative ufology’s antipathy to contactees, NICAP’s Pittsburgh Subcommittee led a remarkably vigorous, open-minded field investigation into Derenbergers early claims as they were occurring — or, more accurately, evolving — until it arrived at the only conclusion possible: that Derenberger’s yarns owed everything to human invention, nothing to extraterrestrial intervention. A local psychologist drawn into the probe — the one who, Keel told McDonald, experienced direct contact himself! — suffered something of a breakdown, seeing saucers invisible to other family members, meanwhile channeling failed prophecies.
Derenberger’s tall tales figure largely in Mothman Prophecies (1975). Keel, who spent time with Derenberger, rejects any notion that the man was just making it up as he went along. He also cites as supporting evidence the adventures of a University of Maryland student, Tom Monteleone, who claimed also to have met denizens of Lanulos and to have traveled to the home planet, whose inhabitants cavort about it in the nude. Monteleone surfaced after he called a Washington, D.C., radio station on which Derenberger was appearing. As Keel writes in Mothman, Even Woody was surprised by such direct confirmation of his own experiences. After meeting Monteleone personally, Keel determined that Monteleone was privy to subtle details about such things that only true UT encounterers would know about; “thus, I finally had to conclude Tom was on the level.”
Except he wasn’t. Monteleone was, one, a psychology major — that alone ought to have raised a red flag or at least a Keelian eyebrow — and, two, an aspiring (and later successful) science-fiction writer. He had conjured up the story on a lark, as a hoax on a hoaxer. Writing in the May 1979 issue of Omni, he crowed, “I contradicted Mr. Derenberger’s story on purpose, claiming to have seen totally different things on my visit to Lanulos. But on each occasion, he would give ground, make up a hasty explanation, and in the end corroborate my own falsifications. He even claimed to know personally the UFOnaut who contacted me!” [viii]
When these revelations saw print,[ix] Keel did not, no surprise, graciously concede that all those conservative ufologists buffs and cultists in Keelian had been right all along. Keel insisted not only that he had known Monteleone was lying from the start, but that anybody who read what he had written on the subject could see that.[x] Well, not so. To the contrary, Keel had been so wowed by Monteleone’s Lanulosian friend Vadig’s customary farewell “I’ll see you in time” that he cited it as evidence that UFOs come from outside our time frame and [Keel’s italics] “from outside the environment of the known universe.” [xi]
It should be stressed, too, that Keel does not always use the word hoax as the rest of us do, to denote humans fooling, or attempting to fool, other humans. In Keelian, hoaxing more often represents what UTs do to us. Since UTs are virtually all powerful, they can represent themselves as just about anything. Consequently, even the most manifestly preposterous encounter claims are real paranormal events, even if not what they seem to witnesses. Thus, Adamski and Derenberger are telling the truth as they saw it; thus, too, the airship inventors of 1896/97 were disguised UTs (even though practically every sober investigator of the airship period has deduced that such figures did not exist outside the fictions of journalist-pranksters). Thus, anything, and I mean anything, goes.
I have a personal history with Keel, whom I have known since if memory serves early 1967, when Charles Bowen, then editor of Flying Saucer Review, brought us together. We entered into correspondence. I was young, impressionable, modestly read, uncritically minded, and in the fashion of the period susceptible to paranoia. In Forbidden Science: Journals 1957-1969 (1992) Jacques Vallee records the following from his entry of April 3, 1969: “Don [Hanlon] believes that Jerome Clark, a young ufologist from Chicago [sic],[xii] has become so convinced that an extraterrestrial [sic] invasion was imminent that he has been driven close to a breakdown.”
Well, not quite — in April 1969 I was more upset about a break-up with a girl friend than about invading UTs — but it is certainly true that I suffered both an unhealthy degree of fright and an overblown imagination. I was hardly alone. Earlier, in December 1967, I had visited Keel at his Manhattan apartment, where he and a young couple caught up in the excitement were trying on gas masks, anticipating an imminent UT strike on New York City. Reading the correspondence I had with Keel and others back then, I can only cringe at the youthful folly painfully in evidence. At least, I suppose I could say in my defense, I had the excuse of being rather younger than Keel.
In any event, I grew up, and away from Keel, though once he had confided his hope that one day I would be the next generation’s John A. Keel. Though I had thought the parting was amicable, I was wrong. As late as the 1990s, long after our personal interaction consisted in its entirety of no more than the rare pleasant note and the even rarer crossing of paths, he was madly spreading slanders whose subject was lapsed Keelist Jerome Clark. When at last I confronted Keel on the matter, he replied that he was only pointing out the obvious, which is that I… "live in a world of paranoid conspiracies and illiterate misconceptions. To curb this you may need extensive psychotherapy, coupled with drug treatment. You are ill and have been haunted by this illness all your life." And so on. In short, the usual charming way of dispatching critics: they say those things because they’re crazy, in the most clinical sense of the adjective. For good measure, he added the to-me-amusing observation that I have fallen for hoax after hoax. [xiii]
None of this matters much, and my annoyance over this strange little episode passed quickly. Still, besides demonstrating Keel’s often-shown preference for vituperation over reasoned discourse, it underscores his crankiness, in both senses of the word. It’s not that Keel will not lightly abide fools; it’s colleagues he objects to. And come to think of it, why given his medieval-demonologist outlook, his relentless credulity, his charm-challenged anti-intellectualism, and, well, his bad manners — would anybody want to be a colleague of Keel’s?
Contrary to general impression, which is wont to credit him with a more creative imagination than he in fact has, he is not a particularly original thinker. His mentor Meade Layne, founder of the occultish (the uncharitable would say crackpotish) Borderland Sciences Research Associates, got many of his ideas from medium Mark Probert, who channeled teachings from, among others, a 500,000-year-old Tibetan.[xiv] If this is your idea of a reliable source of information, God bless you, but I suspect most of you would elect to look elsewhere. Layne, I might mention, thought the etherians UTs were a generally benign lot. It was Trevor James Constable, a student of Layne’s, who first discerned the dark reality beneath the sunny exterior: The spacemen finally begin to emerge as coteries of unethical invisibles, exerting a psychic despotism over innocent and well-meaning people. [xv]
But Keel has been more widely read, and it is largely through him that ufologists and Forteans, or at least some of them, have plunged into the thickets of occultism and obscurantism, into a realm where words like elemental and superspectrum and ultraterrestrial and transmogrification are actually supposed to mean something.[xvi] Into, in other words, a domain of incoherent theory and dubious data and, finally, numbing irrelevance. If Keel were a humorist like Charles Fort rather than a windmill-tilter like Tiffany Thayer,[xvii] one could smile and shrug it off as an ongoing, offbeat joke. No Fortean, to my knowledge, has ever championed Fort’s sky islands or Ambrose-collectors, knowing that Fort wasn’t championing them, either. But Keel is deadly, gloomily, blusteringly, spittle-spewingly in earnest. Though usually politer and calmer about it, so are the legions of acolytes who since then have dropped a ton of Keelist doctrine on all our heads.
Let me close, however, on a mostly positive note. To the best of my recollection, I have been in Keel’s company three times, possibly four. Even with that limited exposure, I think I can safely testify that there are few more entertaining dinner companions. Though it’s hardly something one would infer from his writing public or private, in restaurants he has a dazzling and wicked sense of humor. I also think Mothman Prophecies is a hugely fun book, even if there are whole chunks of it no sensible human would take seriously for a nanosecond. I hope that the movie based on it is a huge success and that Keel makes a ton of money from it. He deserves to retire in peace. And, if the truth be told, the rest of us deserve to be left in the peace of Keel’s retirement.
i. A New Approach to UFO Witnesses, Flying Saucer Review, May/June 1968.
ii. As well as McDonald’s correspondence with a dizzying range of UFO personalities, from the sane to the certifiable.
iii It is surely pointless to mention here that no living physical anthropologist believes that Neanderthals were the ancestors of Homo sapiens.
iv. Our Haunted Planet (Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Publications, 1971).
v. UFOs: Operation Trojan Horse (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1970).
vi. Keel’s explanation for conservative ufologists rejection of claims like these is characteristically ad hominem. In The Flying Saucer Subculture, Journal of Popular Culture 8 (1975), he writes, Interestingly, the hard-core believer [sic] & tends to be over-skeptical & and has an extremely suspicious nature, perhaps because he/she has created an imaginary self-image and constructed the necessary lies to maintain it. Thus they tend to believe that everyone else shares these personality flaws. They often project or transfer their own problems to the UFO witnesses they interview, and many sincere percipients and contactees have been branded liars by UFO enthusiasts who thought they detected their own behavioral problems in them.
vii. Ganymede, of course, is usually thought to be a moon of Jupiter.
viii. Monteleone has his own credibility problems. The Omni confession, devoted chiefly to the ridicule of those foolish enough to believe him, gives the impression that his role as hoaxer was brief and limited. In fact, as late as January 1970, he was making public appearances. In an August 11, 1970, letter to Keel, he stated that the experiences I had with Vadig [his contact from Lanulos] were completely true. This was, of course, long after he had made whatever point he originally intended to make.
ix. Not only in Omni but in a better (and more restrained) piece by Karl T. Pflock; see Anatomy of a UFO Hoax, Fate, November 1980.
x. For example, see Mark Opsasnick’s amusing account in Strange Magazine (Spring 1995). Confronting Keel on his curious assertion that hed always known Monteleone was a fraud, Opsasnick asked, reasonably enough, why, knowing as much, he had still chosen to present it in Mothman Prophecies. Keel snapped, The chapter is about hoaxes! Read the whole chapter! Don’t read one sentence! The whole book says it’s all a crock of shit! Opsasnick notes, I decided to leave it at that. I reread the chapter. It is not about hoaxes. I could only hope that Keel s �statement the published word doesn’t mean anything applies only to this chapter.
xi. The Time Cycle Factor, Flying Saucer Review, May/June 1969.
xii If it matters, I was living in Moorhead, Minnesota, at the time.
xiii. Letter dated March 27, 1996.
xiv. See, for example, Layne’s Mark Probert, Baffling San Diego Medium, Fate, May 1949.
xv. Scientists, Contactees and Equilibrium, Flying Saucer Review, January/February 1960.
xvi. As veteran ufologist Richard Hall once wittily observed (MUFON UFO Journal, August 1977), for all the meaning terms such as these and extra-dimensional, psychical, Magonia, and the like bear, one might as well say that UFOs emanate from the chronosynclastic infindibulum.
xvii. The late James Blish once wrote of Thayer, founder of the Fortean Society, that he advocated almost every imaginable crazy belief. At bottom, he added, every one of these beliefs & turned out to rest on some form of personal devil theory. Cited in Damon Knight’s Charles Fort: Prophet of the Unexplained (Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1970).
Stanton Friedman challenged the science fiction community on the existence of UFOs.
Stanton Friedman was like the Perry Mason of the flying saucer world, equipped and ready to defend any statement, destroy any criticism, debunk any myth.
A nuclear physicist, Friedman's background included inside experience working for front-line companies, including General Electric, General Motors, Westinghouse, and TRW, working on such projects as the development of nuclear flight, fission and fusion space rockets and compact nuclear systems to be applied for space use.
Stanton Friedman's initial involvement came as innocently as many other ufologists—by reading one book. In his case, it was Edward Ruppelt's Report on Unidentified Flying Objects. After many other books, years of research and study, talks with colleagues and others, he decided that, as a scientist, he could conclude that not all, but some UFO's are indeed exploratory vehicles which originated from off the earth.
Data, numbers and logic are the cards in this fact-vs-fiction game, and Friedman insisted that the rules used are straight and consistent. “People ask the wrong questions,” he said. “The question isn't ‘Is every UFO somebody's spacecraft?" The answer is ‘Of course not.’ The real question is, "Are any UFO's somebody else's spacecraft?' and the answer is ‘Yes." It's like asking ‘Is everyone over seven feet tall?" Of course not. ‘Is no one over seven feet tall? Of course not. One can easily get into trouble by asking the wrong question, because then you treat every sighting equally.” One could certainly get into trouble trying to pass off conclusions to Stanton Friedman which had not been thought out.
Isaac Asimov, the science fiction writer, provided plenty of assumptions for Friedman to knock down. One of the most obvious was Asimov's series of calculations to determine whether there's intelligent life anywhere else in the Universe, which appeared in his book, Is Anyone There? Friedman elaborates:
“He starts by focusing on the unanswerable question of whether or not there are other intelligent life forms in the universe. He accepts a starting number of 640,000,000 Earthlike planets. He whittles this number down by an amazing sequence of assumptions...Earth has had life for about 3 billion years, a civilization for about 10,000 (1/300,000 of its history) and an industrial civilization for about 200 years (1/50 of the time for civilization).”
By dividing 640,000,000 by 300,000 and then by 50, Asimov gets 43 industrial civilizations, and further assumes that there are 21 more advanced than we, believing that we are roughly average.
Isaac Asimov, master of science fiction, speculates about life on other planets in Is Anyone There?
Stanton Friedman vs Sci-fi Writers
The articulate Stanton Friedman took a contrary view: “Asimov doesn't seem to know the difference between calendars which measure time and maps which show the distribution of things in space. Knowing the fraction of available time during which there has been a civilization on earth tells absolutely nothing about what fraction of planets have civilizations now, in the past, or in the future."
This kind of assumption, that Earth is the basis for all assumptions, Friedman thought obscured the issues. Asimov “assumes that nobody got started sooner than we did at having a civilization or at having an industrial one. This is un incredible assumption,” Friedman continued, "especially the solar system has been around almost 5 billion years and there are stars 5 billion years older than the sun...an error of only 1/10 of 1 percent in the 3 billion years would be 3 million years. The discussion also leaves out colonization, migration, the exiling of prisoners, or the dispersal of civilizations by those who started sooner.”
Asimov is only one of the popular science fiction writers Friedman took to task. Arthur Clarke, best known for authoring "2001: A Space Odyssey,” felt that the International Geophysical Year (1958), an extended series of experiments among nations, discouraged much interest because “they never discovered a single flying saucer.” Friedman cautioned Clarke to check the record, noting that one of the best photos of a UFO, the celebrated Trinidad photos, was taken on board a ship that was participating in the International Geophysical Year.
Clarke also used the ballistics missile warning radar system as a defense for why he believed no sightings are real, reasoning that such a sensitive system would surely pick them up. Friedman found this type of comment particularly questionable. “Considering that he was a writer and not a professional scientist or engineer working on radar for NORAD, I cannot believe that he would be on the distribution list for radar UFO reports.”
After laying a scientific framework for examining the data and countering arguments against their extraterrestrial source, Stanton Friedman makes a case for at least some UFOs being alien spacecraft.
Absence of Alien Evidence
One of Stanton Friedman's favorite phrases— “absence of evidence is presumed to be evidence for the absence of evidence”—applied here, as it does to page after page of rebuttal and refutation which he compiled, all addressing the remarks, articles and appearances of science fiction writers. He battled egos as often as errors.
“As writers, surely they didn't or haven't worked on classified government sponsored programs. I worked on classified programs for 14 years and I am certain that secrets can be kept. As I have often noted, 80 percent of the engineers and scientists responding to the question, “Do you think the government has revealed all it knows about UFO's?" said, ‘No’ .” And Friedman's role as “Perry Mason” occasionally put him in circumstances where he tilted against a Supreme Court of scientists. Having a scientific background,” he reminded, “in no way assures that you'll treat UFO's appropriately.”
Indeed, an elder statesman of science, Dr. Lee DeForest, who invented the Vacuum tube, was convinced that, regardless of whatever discoveries were made by man, we would never visit the moon. DeForest made these views known in 1957. Hong Ye Chiu, a NASA/Goddard scientist, had written that, “It is unthinkable that the sun would be favorably selected among the 100 billion stars in the galaxy as the most desired star to visit.” Friedman countered: “Nobody says they think of us favorably, or that this is the most desired star—after all, Chicago isn't my favorite place to visit, but I seem to fly there fairly often.”
Even Dr. J. Allen Hynek, professor of Astronomy at Northwestern University, director of the Lindheimer Observatory and for nearly 20 years scientific consultant to the Air Force's Project Blue Book UFO study group, did not escape the Friedman scalpel. In answer to Hynek's contention that there is “no possibility" for space travel, Friedman had this to say: “Since fusion is the major source of energy for the earth and is the major source of energy production in the great majority of stars, one would certainly expect all astronomers to be aware of the fact that a combination of the right nuclei can produce vast amounts of energy per unit weight of the materials reacted. If the right nuclear reactions are involved one can produce charged particles coming out the back end of a rocket with more than 10,000,000 times as much energy per particle, as particles can get in the run-of-the-mill, brute force chemical rockets which we are currently using.”
Friedman felt that there was no way of telling just how many visits we received, and whether multiple sightings are all derived from the same visit. A comparison he enjoyed making is one between a mother ship with smaller earth excursion modules and a Navy aircraft carrier with 75 fighter or bomber planes aboard.
UFO reports are often less accurate because witnesses will usually relate what they've seen, or think they've seen, rather than what they know. Friedman felt that the occupants of spacecrafts were usually humanoids sent to explore earth, and for that reason, had an outward resemblance to figures we would not question. He pointed out that our first being in space was a dog, and then a monkey, indicating to him that what or who is sent on an exploration is not necessarily the brains behind the caper.
The jury may still be out on the final verdict, but a widely-documented, real contact would certainly firm the evidence. What would happen to this planet and its people should this occur? Does the government give any serious thought or planning for this contingency?
“Practically none. I would like to see psychiatrists, religious leaders, psychologists, and god forbid, the military, thinking about what this means. First, we'd have to get over the ego business and recognize we're not the only life in the universe, and probably not the most intelligent.
“Second, I would like people to think what this might mean to religion. I think there's a need to look at the implications of what it means to be an earthling. To me that's the most important consideration. We have no leader. I think we need to recognize that. To them, we do look primitive.”
Two particular areas of concern which Friedman felt could be addressed by anyone interested in the subject, deal with information and access to it. People need to put pressure on the Air Defense Command and other government groups to reveal the highly classified information in their files. Friedman recommended a Centralized UFO Research Facility which anyone in the country could call while observing a UFO. This would tie together local, regional and national sources to record and comment on sightings, beginning with those groups which have been privately conducting this work for years on their own. It would be a 911 for alien sightings. "911, please state the nature of your UFO sighting."
Churchill ordered UFO cover-up, National Archives show
Churchill ordered UFO cover-up, National Archives show
The government took the threat of UFOs so seriously in the 1950s that UK intelligence chiefs met to discuss the issue, newly-released files show.
Ministers even went on to commission weekly reports on UFO sightings from a committee of intelligence experts.
The papers also include a wartime account claiming prime minister Winston Churchill ordered a UFO sighting be kept secret to prevent "mass panic".
The files show reports of UFOs peaked in 1996 - when The X Files was popular.
The Joint Intelligence Committee is better known for providing briefings to the government on matters relating to security, defence and foreign affairs.
But the latest batch of UFO files released from the Ministry of Defence to the National Archives shows that, in 1957, the committee received reports detailing an average of one UFO sighting a week.
The files also include an account of a wartime meeting attended by Winston Churchill in which, it is claimed, the prime minister was so concerned about a reported encounter between a UFO and RAF bombers, that he ordered it be kept secret for at least 50 years to prevent "mass panic".
Nick Pope, who used to investigate UFO sightings for the MoD, said: "The interesting thing is that most of the UFO files from that period have been destroyed.
"But what happened is that a scientist whose grandfather was one of his [Churchill's] bodyguards, said look, Churchill and Eisenhower got together to cover up this phenomenal UFO sighting, that was witnessed by an RAF crew on their way back from a bombing raid.
"The reason apparently was because Churchill believed it would cause mass panic and it would shatter people's religious views."
Reports of sightings of UFOs peaked in 1996 in the UK - when science fiction drama The X Files was popular.
According to the files, there were more than 600 reports in 1996, compared with an average of 240 in the previous five years.
The figures for 1996 show 609 reported sightings of unidentified flying objects, 343 letters from the public to the MoD's UFO desk and 22 enquiries and questions from MPs.
But by 2009, the MoD's UFO inquiry desk -Sec(AS)2 - had been closed down.
The 18 files released on Thursday are the latest to come out as part of a three-year project between the MoD and the National Archives.
Dr David Clarke, a UFO consultant to the National Archives, explained why the papers are being made public now.
Dr Clarke told the BBC: "Since the Freedom of Information Act arrived in 2005, this subject - UFOs - have become the third-most popular subject for people to write to the Ministry of Defence saying 'please could you release this file, or papers that you hold on this particular case'.
"What they've decided to do is to be totally open and to say, 'look we're not holding any secrets back about this subject we've got all these files and we're going to make them available to the public'."
One includes details on "aerial phenomena" prepared for a meeting of the Cabinet Office's Joint Intelligence Committee in April 1957.
According to a note included in the Red Book, the weekly intelligence survey, four incidents involving UFOs tracked by RAF radars were "unexplained".
The documents also include reports of a famous incident dubbed the "Welsh Roswell" in 1974, where members of the public reported seeing lights in the sky and feeling a tremor in the ground.
Other cases included in the files are:
A near-miss with an "unidentified object" reported by the captain and first officer of a 737 plane approaching Manchester Airport in 1995.
A mountain rescue team called to investigate a "crashed UFO" in the Berwyn Mountains in Wales in 1974.
Attempted break-ins at RAF Rudloe Manor in Wiltshire - sometimes referred to as Britain's "Area 51" - the US's secretive desert military base.
The Western Isles incident, when a loud explosion was reported in the sky over the Atlantic in the Outer Hebrides.
The 14-minutes of "missing" film relating to the Blue Streak missile test launch in 1964, believed by some to show a "spaceman".
A gambler from Leeds who held a 100-1 bet on alien life being discovered before the end of the 20th Century, and who approached the government for evidence to support his claim after the bookmakers refused to pay out. The MoD said it was open-minded about extra-terrestrial life but had no evidence of its existence.
The files come from more than 5,000 pages of UFO reports and letters and drawings from members of the public, as well as questions raised by MPs in Parliament.
A UFO sighting was reported in 1973 by at-that-time future president president Jimmy Carter. It didn't attract much attention at the time. I began investigating the case in 1976, when Carter was running for president. However, there was no accurate information available to make it possible to find out what Carter saw. I began making various inquiries, looking for someone who might be able to provide some facts on the case. Finally, someone suggested that I contact Hayden Hewes, director of the International UFO Bureau, who had written a brief piece on the Carter sighting for Argosy UFO [Nov., 1976]. I reached Mr. Hewes by telephone at his home in Oklahoma City, and it was he who provided the first significant lead. When brief press reports appeared during the big UFO flap of 1973 to the effect that Governor Carter had previously spotted a UFO, the International UFO Bureau mailed a UFO sighting report to Carter at the State Capitol in Atlanta. Carter apparently filled out the form in some haste, his handwritten replies brief and not easily legible. He then mailed it back to Oklahoma. Mr. Hewes was kind enough to lend me a photographic transparency of the 1973 report in Carter's own handwriting.
It turns out that the sighting occurred in Leary, Georgia, about forty miles from Carter's home town of Plains, on the evening of January 6, 1969. (Carter mis-remembered the date as sometime on October, 1969, but I contacted the Lions Club headquarters in Illinois, which established the date as January 6). The future president was then the local district governor of the Lion's Club, and had come to Leary to boost the local chapter. While standing outdoors at approximately 7:15 pm, waiting for the Lion's Club meeting to begin, Mr. Carter reported seeing a single "self-luminous" object, "as bright as the moon," which reportedly approached and then receded several times. A reporter taped Carter's exact words in 1973 describing the UFO sighting. Carter said,
There were about twenty of us standing outside of a little restaurant, I believe, a high school lunch room, and a kind of a green light appeared in the western sky. This was right after sundown. It got brighter and brighter. And then eventually it disappeared. It didn't have any solid substance to it, it was just a very peculiar-looking light. None of us could understand what it was. I've never made fun of people who've seen other things of that kind (From the documentary recording Factual Eyewitness Testimony of UFO Encounters, Chicago: Investigative Research Associates, Inc., 1978).
A copy of Carter's hand-written UFO sighting report, that I obtained from Hayden Hewes.
Although Carter reports that "ten members" of the Leary Lion's Club also witnessed the event, attempts to locate ten other witnesses proved fruitless. No one else seems to have paid much attention to the "UFO." While most Leary residents I interviewed did recall Mr. Carter's visit, even those who attended the meeting had no recollection or knowledge of any unidentified object being sighted.
I began making inquiries of various UFO researchers, looking for someone who might be able to provide some facts on the case. Finally, someone suggested that I contact Hayden Hewes, director of the International UFO Bureau, who had written a brief piece on the Carter sighting for Argosy UFO [Nov., 1976]. I reached Mr. Hewes by telephone at his home in Oklahoma City, and it was he who provided the first significant lead. When brief press reports appeared during the big UFO flap of 1973 to the effect that Governor Carter had previously spotted a UFO, the International UFO Bureau mailed a UFO sighting report to Carter at the State Capitol in Atlanta. Carter apparently filled out the form in some haste, his handwritten replies brief and not easily legible. He then mailed it back to Oklahoma. Mr. Hewes was kind enough to lend me a photographic transparency of the 1973 report in Carter's own handwriting.
Mr. Carter reports that his "UFO" was in the western sky, at about 30 degrees elevation. This almost perfectly matches the known position of Venus, which was in the west-southwest at an altitude of 25 degrees, azimuth 237 degrees. It was shining brilliantly at Magnitude -4.3, brighter than anything else in the sky. Weather records show that the sky was clear at the time of the sighting. Given the long history of Venus as "Queen of the UFOs," it seemed that we had the clear solution on hand. I wrote in The Humanist magazine (then edited by Paul Kurtz), July-August, 1977 (p.46)
President Carter's "UFO" Is Identified as the Planet Venus
President Jimmy Carter's widely-reported "UFO sighting," which he made public while Governor of Georgia, was in fact a misidentification of the planet Venus. Several errors of identification within Mr. Carter's report demonstrate that the eyewitness testimony of even a future president of the United States cannot be taken at face value when investigating UFO sightings.
The incident occurred in Leary, Georgia, about forty miles from Plains, on the evening of January 6, 1969. Mr. Carter was the local district governor of the Lion's Club, and had come to Leary to boost the local chapter. While standing outdoors at approximately 7:15 pm, waiting for the Lion's Club meeting to begin, Mr. Carter reported seeing a single "self-luminous" object, "as bright as the moon," which reportedly approached and then receded several times. Mr. Carter reports that his "UFO" was in the western sky, at about 30 degrees elevation. This almost perfectly matches the known position of Venus, which was in the west-southwest at an altitude of 25 degrees. Weather records show that the sky was clear at the time of the sighting.
No other object generates as many UFO reports as the planet Venus. Venus is not as bright as the moon, nor does it actually approach the viewer, or change size and brightness, but descriptions like these are typical of misidentifications of a bright planet. Every time Venus reaches its maximum brilliance in the evening sky, hundreds of "UFO sightings" of this type are made. At the time of the Carter UFO sighting, Venus was a brilliant evening star, nearly one hundred times brighter than a first-magnitude star.
And for the most part, serious UFO researchers accepted this identification. After all, Jacques Vallee, who is certainly no debunker, had written,
No single object has been misinterpreted as a "flying saucer" more than the planet Venus. The study of these mistakes proves quite instructive, for it shows beyond all possible dispute the limitations of sensory perception and the weakness of accounts relating shapes and motions of point sources or objects with small apparent diameters. (Challenge to Science, 1966, p. 110).
The southwest sky as seen from Leary, Ga, at 7:15 PM January 6, 1969. The Bull's Eye shows the calculated position where a barium cloud might have been visible, quite close to Venus. (Sky chart generated using the free open-source program Cartes du Ciel.)
So there the matter stood for forty years. Then just a week ago, an associate of space writer and skeptic James Oberg contacted him, suggesting the possibility that what Carter might have seen was a bright barium space cloud from a NASA rocket, launched to study the behavior of the upper atmosphere. In fact, this possibility was discussed in episode 561 of the popular skeptics' podcast Skeptics Guide to the Universe on April 9, 2016, although neither Oberg nor I was aware of this. I was familiar with such launches, and even saw one in the 1970s when I was living in Maryland. (Frankly, the one I saw was not all that bright or spectacular.)
James Oberg made this map, showing the location of Leary, Georgia, and the path of the rockets.
Supporting the Barium cloud hypothesis are Carter's statements that the object "Seemed to move tow(ard?) us from a distance - Sto(p?) move partially away Return then depart Bluish at first - then reddish - Luminous - not solid.
Against the Barium cloud hypothesis is Carter's statement that the object was "sharply outlined."
More research needs to be done before we can conclude that a Barium space cloud was definitely responsible for this famous sighting. But it seems an intriguing possibility.
André SkondrasIs it true, as some skeptics proclaim, that most UFOs are IFOs caused by the planet Venus, ice crystals, clouds and other atmospheric phenomena? Is this substantiated from the sightings statistics?Bekijk vertaling
André SkondrasI just received a reply from a highly skeptical researcher: "Skeptics and debunkers cannot provide any Venus IFO stats. I challenged a Belgian UFO researcher a few years back and he had nothing, in fact could not even find a single recent case on his UFO reporting group's sighting list." ;)Bekijk vertaling
André SkondrasAnd this highly skeptical researcher went on to say: "The Carter sighting has been nailed as the rocket barium cloud and here we find Sheaffer trying to oppose it with nitpicking and pleas for open mind because it explodes his Venus theory." ;)Bekijk vertaling
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence - NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - Part 1
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence
Don't Just Believe Me, But Do Look At The Evidence. By Paul Dean. Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - Part 1
About a year ago, I took the plunge and begun the near-impossible task of ascertaining what role joint US/Canadian North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) has maintained regarding the UFO matter. Sure enough, just as I had suspected, there is a paper trail dating back decades, and much of it makes for rather awkward reading. Furthermore, I have been working with David Charmichael, a brilliant British citizen who has been aggressively asking NORAD, and its parent agency Northern Command (NORTHCOM), one of ten Unified Combatant Commands organised directly under the Secretary of Defence and Joint Chiefs of Staff, for some honest answers regarding the oddities they track on vast radar systems, and other UFO-related matters. Together he and I have discovered much.
For those that don’t know, NORAD, as its current Fact Sheet states, is: “...charged with the missions of aerospace warning and aerospace control for North America. Aerospace warning includes the detection, validation, and warning of attack against North America whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles, through mutual support arrangements with other commands. Aerospace control includes ensuring air sovereignty and air defence of the airspace of Canada and the United States.”.
Put simply, NORAD uses myriad primary and secondary radars to build up an integrated, recognised air and aerospace picture, even out into sub-space, of what is flying around about the USA and Canada. NORAD has generally maintained that the only “UFOs” they detect and track are simply strayed aircraft, hostile formations of Russian combat aircraft and such. NORAD do not have any interest, or, any knowledge, of our sort of “UFO” events. Unfortunately for NORAD, however, if one goes by what the contents of their own declassified paperwork says, the overwhelming evidence is that they have not been honest, and this dishonesty has been going on since the 1950’s. But first, let’s see what official concoctions NORAD has come up with over the long years. The Official Stance In a reply letter dated 10th November, 1975, Colonel Terrence C. James, NORAD Headquarters, Ent Air Force Base, to researcher Robert Todd, it was stated: “…this command has no present activity in investigating UFOs, nor does any area of the United States government that I’m aware of.” Another letter from NORAD HQ, dated 28th, November, 1975, also to Robert Todd, said: “We do not undertake investigative measures… …our interests are satisfied in near real time, and no formal documentation is created by this command.” In a 19 December 1995 letter to researcher Dr. Armen Victorian, NORAD’s Directorate of Information clarified their terminology, while distancing themselves, as one would expect, from the core UFO issue: “Historically, the term UFO was used by the Air Force starting in 1947 and ending in 1969 with the shelving of the Project Blue Book. We all know what the term UFO means, we just don’t use it... …The specific term “UFO” is not used by this command even though you could say that this term would equate to Unknown Track Report: either an Uncorrelated Event or an Unknown Track, since an unidentified flying object could be considered either.” These official statements may sound legitimate at face value, but, in fact, they fly in the face of various documents begrudgingly released by the US military over five long decades.
For Restricted Readership Since 1954, the “Joint Army Navy Air Force Protocol 146” (JANAP 146) procedures, promulgated by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have issued a series of “Communications Instructions for Vital Intelligence Sightings”, more commonly referred to as simply “CIRVIS”. The timely reporting of UFO’s by militaryand civilian pilots, as well as other professionals, is clearly laid down in these CIRVIS procedures, and, first on the addressing distribution list is none other than the Commander-in-Chief, NORAD (CINCNORAD). For example, the February 1959 version of JANAP CIRVIS procedures, published as JANAP 146(D), states, in part, under the “Information to be Reported and When to Report” section on Page 8: (1) While airborne and from land based observers.
(a) Hostile or unidentified single aircraft or formations of aircraft which appear to be directed against the United States or Canada or their forces.
(c) Unidentified flying objects.
(d) Hostile or unidentified submarines.
(e) Hostile or unidentified group or groups of military surface vessels…”
(f) Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious activity or observed in a location or on a course which may be interpreted as constituting a threat to the United States, Canada or their forces.
(g) Any unexplained or unusual activity which may indicate a possible attack against or through Canada or the United States, including the presence of any unidentified or other suspicious ground parties in the Polar Region or other remote or sparsely populated areas.” Note, that “Unidentified Flying Objects” is listed as distinct from single aircraft, formations of aircraft, missiles, etc. Below is an image of this page from JANAP 146(D) CIRVIS.
Of even more interest are these two procedural statements, on Page 12:
“c. A post-landing report is desired immediately after landing by CINCNORAD or RCAF-ADC to amplify the airborne report(s).” And, “(1) Post-landing reports should be addressed to CINCNORAD, Ent AFB, Colorado Springs, Colorado, or, RCAF-ADC, St. Hubert, Quebec…” CINCNORAD is merely Commander-in-Chief, NORAD, and, RCAF-ADC is Royal Canadian Air Force, Air Defence Command. Below is an image of the page.
Thus it is established that NORAD, even so long ago, was very much concerning itself with serious UFO sightings made by US or Canadian forces, and any claims to the contrary are absolute nonsense. Now, I can already hear the “But, that was in 1959! What about something current?!”. The 2008 “Air Force Instruction 10-206 Operational Reporting” instruction contains the second most current CIRVIS sightings procedures, which still include “Unidentified Flying Objects” as separate from aircraft, missiles, etc. On Page 36, it is stated, with regards to the addressee of such “vital” reports: “5.3. Submitted To: 5.3.1. Airborne reports: US, Canadian military, or civilian communications facility. 5.3.2. Post-landing reports: Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), Cheyenne Mt, Colorado, or HQ Northern NORAD Region, North Bay, Ontario, Canada, whichever is more convenient. If landing outside Canadian or US territories, submit reports through the nearest Canadian military or diplomatic representative or US.” So much for NORAD not being in the US military’s “UFO loop”.
“Unknown Objects” It isn’t just the above mentioned CIRVIS procedures which raise questions. NORAD’s Operational Instruction Index 0-2, coded “RCCOI 0-2” and dated 7th of March, 1978, inventories a number of instructional publications vital to the overall mission success of NORAD Regional and Sector Operations Centers. Page 2 of the index lists a 9th of May, 1977 instruction titled “Possible Unknowns, Unknowns, Special Tracks and Unknown Objects Actions”. The Below the list is imaged.
There a numerous such NORAD indexes that contain references to classified publications., and through diligent research, some of these publications have been released. The above mentioned instruction, coded 55-8, contains a section, on Page 6, titled “Unknown Objects”, and states, on part: “...Unknown object reporting will be accomplished using the same procedures as for Unknown Track reporting. NORAD Form 61 will be used even though such observations may not result in track establishment.”
This makes very clear that “unknown objects” are of concern to NORAD, despite what the United States government has ceaselessly said to the public. The page in question is imaged below.
While these procedural and instructional records are significant, there is far more material which catches NORAD out red-handed being involved with localized and serious UFO events. In my next post, Part 2 of this series, I will be highlighting such material which provides ample evidence that NORAD know far more about the UFO issue than they are prepared to discuss.
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence - NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - PART 2
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence
Don't Just Believe Me, But Do Look At The Evidence. By Paul Dean. Contact: email@example.com
NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - PART 2
Continuing on from my Part 1 of my series, titled “NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen” I will carry on presenting evidence, in the form of declassified documents, that the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) has been heavily involved in significant, inexplicable and unexplainable UFO events since its formation in 1957. Even when given the opportunity to disclose UFO case and study records to the flawed the University of Colorado’s “UFO Study” (the US Air Force’s final word on the UFO matter in 1969), NORAD managed to stay nearly silent on the matter despite evidence they were sitting on vital, even startling information. I am not attempting here to analysis the actual cases as such. This would not be the appropriate platform to do so, and, much work has been done of these events already. What I am attempting to do is prove NORAD, like so many other agencies, have not been truthful, which is getting seemingly easier every day.
“Unidentified Flying Objects” Take, for example, a 10th of April, 1964 information relay message found in the US Air Force’s (USAF) Project Blue Book records. The document highlights and summarises the contents of previous information moving around US Air Force Headquarters (USAF/HQ), USAF Air Staff, and the National Military Command Center (NMCC). In the subject line there are three very familiar words: “Unidentified Flying Objects”. Under this, two pieces of sectioned information state: “NMCC, NORAD advised that there were 6 to 12 unidentified flying objects at 30 miles East of Merced, California. Radar picked up 12 objects at altitudes 60,000 ft., 90,000 ft., and higher elevations. F-106’s were scrambled at Castle Air Force Base. There were no results because of high altitudes. They are checking the possibility of sending U-2’s.” And, “Objects were following a 60 mile race-track pattern. F-106’s were flying a 90,000 ft. altitude.Pilots locked on to some of the objects but could not keep the lock. NORAD said they were sending 2 more XXXXX aircraft with pilots in pressure suits.”
The case was later dismissed by the USAF as one mere weather balloon. Whether that conclusion is accurate has been debated ad nauseam, but for the purposes of my study it is interesting to note that NORAD is mentioned not once, but twice, in the message text. Specifically, “NMCC, NORAD advised that there were 6 to 12 unidentified flying objects...”and “NORAD said they were sending 2 more XXXXX aircraft with pilots in pressure suits.”. So, for NORAD to state – as they did throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s – that they had no interest or “records held” relating to unidentified flying objects is clearly deceptive. Below is an image of this record.
Another record, dated September 10, 1972, and sent from 22 NORAD Region Headquarters, (22NRHQ) North Bay, Ontario, Canada to both the Canadian Forces Headquarters (CFHQ) and the National Research Council (NRC) is an unclassified telex discovered in the Canadian Archives, along with dozens of others like it. It details an object seen visually, and, tracked on radar by two tower operators at North Bay Airport, which is connected to Canada’s NORAD Operations Headquarters. Described visually as “one object flashing red and green lights, speed very slow to 300 knots at 4000 to 6000 feet estimated”, the report then gives the following further description: “Visual sighting correlated with a North Bay terminal radar return at 340 degrees, six miles. Object appeared to turn in tight circles or hover for approx. 15 minutes and then lose altitude steadily with flashing lights becoming dimmer until visual contact lost at 0345Z. Radar contact lost prior to visual contact.” Below is an image of the telex.
Aside from the obvious fact that NORAD, again, is mentioned in what can only be described assome sort of UFO event, two interesting issues are raised here. Firstly, the message reads “UNLCAS” in the security classification line – meaning “unclassified”. In other words, the contents of the message are not security or intelligence sensitive. From this, one can’t help but wonder what sort of material is held in NORAD records which are classified. Apparently there are many. Secondly, it is interesting to note that the telex was sent from NORAD, not to NORAD – further rubbishing the assertions that they have not one scrap of interest in odd aerial incidents.
In another Canadian telex, again sent from 22NRHQ to the CFHQ and NRC, dated 4th July, 1972, states that Captain Sorefleet and Captain Drury, stationed at Canadian Forces Base Bagotville, Quebec, reported one “white oval” while flying in a fighter jet at 35,000 feet. The description indicates a“small red tail”. This, of course, could be a meteor sighting. However, the telex finally states “observed for 2 minutes about 40 miles”. Whatever the object was, it was clearly unidentifiable enough that the pilots wished to report it, and NORAD was part of that process.
The page is imaged below.
These events occurred in 1972, only 2 years after the Secretary of the USAF famously claimed that no US military agency, which includes NORAD, will continue the reporting, or receiving of reports, of UFO events, and, that: “No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force was ever an indication of threat to our national security.” But did the US Department of Defence – especially the commands dealing with air defence and air warfare – really accept this? Do we have any evidence that the above statement is complete rubbish barely fit for the trash bin?
Who’s Got Their Stories Straight At Air Force Headquarters This Week? In 1979, research Robert Todd had the USAF release some of the documents related to the closure of Project Blue Book – the USAF’s 17 year study (one of three such study’s) into the UFO phenomenon. One of the documents was a 20th October, 1969 memo known as the “Bolender Memo”. Signed by Brigadier General Carrol H. Bolender, Deputy Director of Development, USAF, the second page of the memo contains two passages which depart radically from the USAF’s above mentioned statement that no UFO event reported or investigated was a threat to national security. Those passages are: “Moreover, reports of unidentified flying objects which could affect national security are made in accordance with JANAP 146 or Air Force Manual 55-11, and are not part of the Blue Book system.” And, “However, as already stated, reports of UFOs which could affect national security would continue to be handled through the standard Air Force procedures designed for this purpose.” Below is an image of the page in question.
The Bolender Memo, quite simply, admits that some UFO reports can, and do affect national security. This flies in the face of what the public were being told. Also, the memo indicates that Project Blue Book was never supposed to receive the most alarming, security-vital UFO reports, and, specifically, such reports were being made using the “Joint Army Navy Air Force Protocol 146(E)”(JANAP 146E) system or “Air Force Manual 55-11” (AFM 55-11). In fact, at this time Project Blue Book, and the University of Colorado’s flawed “UFO Study”, was only receiving reports filed using “Air Force Regulation 80-17” (AFR 80-17). This raises awkward questions. For example, if Project Blue Book staff were not getting a chance to evaluate the most sensitive UFO reports submitted by USAF airmen and other military professionals, then who was? As I highlighted in my Part 1 of this series, the USAF and NORAD were in fact at the receiving end of UFO reports made using JANAP 146E’s “Communication Instructions for Vital Intelligence Sightings” (CIRVIS) procedures. UFO reports made using AFM 55-11, using the “Air Force Operational Reporting System” (AFOREP), were likely occurring too. America’s political leaders have not been told about all this, even when they have asked specific questions. In a reply letter to Senator Patty Murray, dated August 25, 1993, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Shubert, USAF, stated: “As information, the Air force began investigating UFOs in 1948 under a program called Project Sign. Later, the program's name was changed to Project Grudge and, in 1953, it became known as Project Blue Book. On December 17, 1969, the Secretary of the Air Force announced the termination of Project Blue Book... ...As a result of these investigations, studies, and experience, the conclusions of Project Blue book were: 1) no UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given any indication of threat to our national security…” Again, compare this with the contents of the Bolender Memo: “…reports of unidentified flying objects which could affect national security are made in accordance with JANAP 146 or Air Force Manual 55-11, and are not part of the Blue Book system.”.Since the public and Congress did not, and do not, know about this JANAP 146 and AFM 55-11 business, the impression can be easily given, as it was to Senator Murray, that the USAF had then, and have now, no reason to take whatsoever the UFO matter seriously. Below is an image of the USAF letter to Patty Murray.
The above examples are only a handful of quite contradictory pieces of information that have managed to find their way out of NORAD, and the wider US military. I have countless more on file. Thousands. Why are we consistently finding that the press, the public, and even politicians were, and still are now, told one thing, but, in classified documents, meant for very restricted readership, the exact opposite is stated? Recently, retired USAF Colonel Charles Halt, who was Deputy Base Commander of the Bentwaters Air Force Base during the famous Rendlesham Forest event, stated: “I’ve heard many people say that it’s time for the government to appoint an agency to investigate. Folks, there is an agency, a very close-held, compartmentalized agency that’s been investigating this for years, and there’s a very active role played by many of our intelligence agencies that probably don’t even know the details of what happens once they collect the data and forward it. It’s kind of scary, isn’t it?” Should we brush these sort of comments aside? Maybe not. He may just be confirming what government documents have been telling us all along.
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence - NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - Part 3
UFOs - Documenting The Evidence
Don't Just Believe Me, But Do Look At The Evidence. By Paul Dean. Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
NORAD And The UFO Smokescreen - Part 3
This blogpost is the third in a series which aims to link, through official and documented record, the UFO matter with the huge North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). For over 50 years, NORAD’s stance on so-called “UFOs” – and I don’t mean merely stray aircraft – is that they know nothing, see nothing and hold nothing on record. However, myriad US military documents prove that NORAD has not been entirely honest. In this post I will highlight two especially unusual occasions where they were certainly involved. But, beforehand, if my readers need to catch up, I have linked is Part 1 and Part 2.
UFOs Are Tracked On NORAD Systems: And That’s Fact Now down to business. A little known fact concerning the infamous Japan Airlines sighting in 1986 is that NORAD almost definitely played a role in the extraordinary event, completely aside from the FAA and even the USAF. For those that do not know about this case, I will only briefly summarise it. On November 17th, 1986, Japan Airlines (JAL) cargo flight 1628 was flying at nearly 900 kilometres an hour over Alaska. Just after sunset, the three crew witnessed a series of UFO encounters that last for 31 minutes, and, the entire fiasco was watched on both FAA primary radar, and, USAF primary radar. The case made headlines around the world. In 2000, John Callahan, Chief of the FAA’s Accidents, Evaluations and Investigations division confirmed the seriousness of the event, and the involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency and the President’s Scientific Staff. He also came forward with more FAA evidence, on top of the hundreds of pages of official documentation already released. NORAD’s involvement has been overlooked in this case, I believe. At the heart of the matter, we know for an absolute fact that both the primary radar at the FAA’s Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (AARTCC), and the primary radar at the USAF’s Elmendorf Air Force Base Regional Operations Command Center (ROCC) picked up “surge primary returns” next to the JAL flight. As these returns were being watched on the screens, the crew were discussing with the FAA, over radio, the worrisome traffic they had around them. It’s a classic radar-visual case, pure and simply. The actual voice tapes of this event are available, and one can actually hear the gravity of the situation in the voices of the pilot, as well as those of the air traffic controllers at FAA AARTCC and USAF ROCC. The important thing here is that there may have been, in some no-doubt complex way, a third set of air traffic controllers, using a third system, watching the event. In the official FAA voice tape transcript the USAF’s ROCC controller says, at 5:38:51: “Ah, I’m gonna talk to my other radar man here has gotta, he’s got some other equipment watching this aircraft.” The passage of speech is somewhat broken, but he clearly says “my other radar man here” and“some other equipment”. Considering it is a USAF controller who was talking, one can’t help but question who “my other radar man” could be, and, what “other equipment” was “watching” the UFOs around the JAL flight? It turns out it was probably NORAD. Elmendorf Air Force Base had, in the 1980’s, a more classified system operated by NORAD, which complimented the USAF hardware. The two merged in Year 2000, but, back in 1986, NORAD’s presence wasn’t exactly advertised at the time of the JAL 1628 UFO sightings. In fact, when one reads that dismal FAA paperwork on the incident, even the USAF’s involvement, let alone NORAD’s, was barely mentioned, despite the fact that they were watching the same thing on their screens, and stating such to the FAA controllers and the JAL pilots. Whatever the exact situation, speculation that NORAD was involved in this event is strengthened when one reads a particular FAA document from the FAA’s JAL 1628 report. After one of the post-landing interviews between the JAL crew and FAA Special Agents James Derry and Ronald Mickle, Special Agent Derry wrote a one page statement. The final paragraph states: “Upon completion of my discussion with the crew, I called Captain Stevens (Duty Officer to NORAD) and asked if he had any questions other than what I had asked. He said he had no other questions, but they also showed two targets on radar (one was JAL). He stated that they would give all data to Intelligence in the morning. I then asked Bobby Lamkin by phone if the Air Force was holding the data and he said yes” Below is an image of this document.
NORAD On Alert Another incident where NORAD paperwork connects them, very strongly I might add, to serious UFO events, is the extraordinary October-November, 1975 “over flights” of a dozen US military bases by unknown aircraft, variously described as mundane helicopters right through to totally unfamiliar and oddly performing craft that appeared repeatedly on ground-based radar and utterly eluded USAF authorities for weeks. These events were highlighted in Barry Greenwood and Lawrence Fawcett’s game-changing 1984 book “Clear Intent”, later published with the title “UFO Cover Up: What the Government Won’t Say”. I will not even attempt here to give an overview of the wave of UFO activity that occurred at that time. What does need to be said though is that hundreds and hundreds of pages of official documents were released from nearly two dozen commands and agencies within the US military throughout 1976 to 1983. Barry Greenwood and Robert Todd accessed most of them, and Barry fondly tells me how stunned he was – time after time – that such raw intelligence and front-line reporting was being furnished to him. These researchers cannot be thanked enough for their work.
Amongst those piles of gold, was a four page release of “incident” summaries extracted from both the NORAD Command Directors Log and the 24th NORAD Region Senior Director’s Log. The time period for released material was from the 29th of October to the 10th of November, 1975. The actual documents were released to researcher Todd Zechel on the 4th of October, 1977. Despite the fact these are quite well known, I wish to highlight some of the contents, and provide imagery of the offending pages. The first page details various worrisome intrusions by “unknown helicopters” over Loring Air Force Base, Maine, Wurtsmith Air Force Base, Michigan, and Malmstrom Air Force Base, Montana – all of which maintained mission-ready nuclear weapons.
The stakes are raised on page 2 of the release where the 24th NORAD Region Senior Director's Log (Malmstrom AFB, Montana) The most alarming incident summaries are probably: “7 Nov 75 (1035Z) - Received a call from the 341st Strategic Air Command Post (SAC CP), saying that the following missile locationsreported seeing a large red to orange to yellow object: M-1, L-3, LIMA and L-6. The general object location would be 10 miles south of Moore, Montana, and 20 miles east of Buffalo, Montana. Commander and Deputy for Operations (DO) informed.” And, for the actual word “UFO”, “7 Nov 75 (1429Z) - From SAC CP: As the sun rose, the UFOs disappeared. Commander and DO notified.”
On page 3, the continuing NORAD summaries mention the term “UFO” five times, plus radar tracks of “unknowns”, “objects”, plus the inspection of such events by fighter jets, which met with failure.
The page is imaged below.
The final page summarises a continuation of similar events that kept plaguing nuclear-weapon equipped bases along the US-Canadian untill mid-November. One piece of text, which brought Minot Air Force Base into the spectacle states:
“10 Nov 75 (1125Z) - UFO sighting reported by Minot Air Force Station, a bright star-like object in the west, moving east, about the size of a car. First seen approximately 1015Z. Approximately 1120Z, the object passed over the radar station, 1,000 feet to 2,000 feet high, no noise heard. Three people from the site or local area saw the object. NCOC notified.”
Finally, this 4 page NORAD release was finalised with some interesting statements which eluded to more material that related to the over flights of these bases, and, thus, Todd Zechel's FOI request. The text indicates that more documents of NORAD providence are in existence, but that they are not fit for release to the public due to legal exemptions. Specifically: “2. HQ USAF/DADF also forwarded a copy of NORAD document for a review for possible downgrade and release. We have determined the document if properly and currently classified and is exempt from disclosure under Public Law 90-23, 5 USC 552b(1).” These pages were signed off by one Colonel Terrance C. James, USAF, Director of Administration. The USAF and NORAD run administrative and functional operations hand-in-hand, thus, a USAF Colonel was able to clear this material for release. Also, aside from the above releases, there were actually a great deal more documents of NORAD providence, or, that mentioned NORAD, released to the likes of Barry Greenwood, Robert Todd, Lawrence Fawcett, Todd Zechel and others in that extraordinary period of FOI openness. In one, which Barry Greenwood has on file, the Commander-in-Chief of NORAD sent a four-part message to various NORAD units on November 11, 1975 summarizing the events: “Since 28 Oct 75 numerous reports of suspicious objects have been received at the NORAD CU; reliable military personnel at Loring AFB, Maine, Wurtsmith AFB, Michigan, Malmstrom AFB, Mt, Minot AFB, ND, and Canadian Forces Station, Falconbridge, Ontario, Canada have visually sighted suspicious objects.” Regardless of who released what, clearly any NORAD Log Extracts that contain the phraseology like “UFOs”, radar tracks of low-flying “unknowns”, “objects” and “unknown helicopters” indeed fall within our area of interest. NORAD, as well as other US military branches, stated that these incidents were “isolated”, but even the most bone-headed skeptic would not accept that. In my next blog post I will be discussing more about NORAD's capabilities and mission, and the current and ongoing efforts by myself and UK researcher David Charmichael to get to the bottom of how NORAD currently handles the UFO matter. Stay tuned.
The Placard of the Roswell Slides: The Final Curtain
The Placard of the Roswell Slides: The Final Curtain
Special Rush report from The Roswell Slides Research Group The Roswell Slides second biggest mystery was the content of the placard on the alleged alien body. Several statements were made about it, some contradictory:
The Roswell Slides and the Truth by Anthony Bragalia
This ‘placard’ is not very evident in the video grab image. However, it has been enlarged by experts and the writing, in red ink, is handwritten, not typed, as would be found in a biological display in a museum.
Tom Carey was interviewed about the Roswell Slides on the March 22, 2015 episode of Jaime Maussan’s Contacto on Tercer Milenio TV. Carey said that experts have been able to read some words on the placard on the case and that, “debunkers will be disappointed.”
Tom Carey and Don Schmitt were interviewed, of the show's expert presentations, Schmitt said:
This will be part of the event, part of the program in May, that all of these analytical reports, all of the analyses, all of the main experts as well as the photographic experts who examined- there’s a placard, very fuzzy, that can not be legibly read by the naked eye, yet we’ve had everyone from Dr. David Rudiak, to Studio MacBeth, even the Photo Interpretation Department of the Pentagon, as well as Adobe have all told us that it’s beyond the pale, that it cannot be read, it is totally up to interpretation.
So, we truly feel we have performed due diligence; we have done everything we can to substantiate and prove what is contained within these slides, whether it is something of a human malady or something truly extraordinary. https://youtu.be/fQyAVrFnTos?t=1h24m2s
During BeWitness, it was announced that despite the work of a number of experts, the placard could absolutely not be read.
The slide with the placard was visible, and the writing was evident, if unclear.
News coverage, claiming the placard could not be read,
"We couldn't make anything clearly out of the placard...several others, who did not have much luck." - Adam Dew
"Nobody could read anything decisively in the placard, unfortunately. I am sure people will make attempts to do this going forward..... " Adam Dew
He was right, and most of the placard has now been read.
A member of The Roswell Slides Research Team used a newly acquired source image of the placard seen in front of the body. By manipulating the commercial software, SmartDeblur, he managed to significantly clear up the blurred text. Other members offered suggestions and helped narrow down the actual words.
There is little doubt that this is the true and correct text.
The other 3 lines of the text are somewhat hard to read, some words more than others.
It seems to say something like:
MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY
At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton
shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of these small cotton blankets.
Loaned by the Mr. Xxxxxx, San Francisco, California
The entire effort only took hours, quite a difference from the claimed “years” of research that the Maussan camp claimed. Because the Slide hucksters haven’t released proper high resolution scans of the slides, our work was made more difficult. We could probably get clearer results from better images.
The mystery of the placard is solved, and so is the nature of the body in the case. A boy, from Earth. The question then, becomes, how was this not discovered by the experts examining the case in the years of investigation? More details and proper credits to follow in updates. The placard is just a part of the story. The Roswell Slides Research Group
I will reserve judgement re the recent Mexico live event, because I haven't seen the broadcast yet. However, allow me to make a personal observation re the presented "Roswell" slides. Based on everything what has been said prior and after the televised Mexico event, I assume that there is common agreement that the slides are real and depict a real 1940s event captured on late 1940s Kodachrome film. There has only been serious doubt whether the slides have anything whatsoever to do with the July, 1947 Roswell incident. The question I have been asking myself is whether the researchers involved -- or anyone else for that matter -- have made the investigative effort to determine at which "museum" the picture might have been taken, that had such a "being" on display, apparently lying next to a "gorilla" or "ape" head, apparently also equipped with a caption card. It would seem reasonable to assume that there must be some official body which holds historical 1940s records of "weird" and "freaky" museums in the US or abroad. It would seem rather odd to me at least that there wouldn't be more pictures of this particular "museum" and this particular "being" with an "ape" head apparently lying adjacent to it. If one could find relevant evidence to that effect, that would put this matter to rest for always I guess, as has e.g. been done with an indepth investigation into the mid 1990s alien autopsy film, which had also been heavily debated on prior and after the televised presentation and dismissed as a fraud or an autopsy of a deformed human being by "experts". The investigation ultimately led to the participants involved in the hoaxing of this autopsy film. Now, there is common agreement that this footage is a hoax because of the unmasking of the main leading actors.
Dr. Clarke, Glad You Included "Access To Top Secret Material"
Allow me to make the following tentative observation(s): Even if these slides portray the real deal, viz. showing an "alien" recovered somewhere in New Mexico in the late 1940s time frame), access to the real deal (= the real bodies), if it exists, -- most likely classified as Top Secret material -- will be almostimpossible to outsiders. As long as this hard evidence isn't official public property, the secret will be safe within the hands of the alleged secret keepers (if they exist) whoever and wherever they may be. As I have said before, I believe evidence re UFOs presented will only become generally accepted fact if it will bear an official stamp of approval from the US Government. As long as this doesn't happen, every bit of evidence presented by the UFO community will be disregarded and mocked unless, of course, "they" show up in such a manifest way that it can't be denied any longer. And in the absence of such (officially approved) hard evidence, I'd like to add that one should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's my personal belief that the discussions re the Roswell slides have predominantly been negative. Why not focus on the good and positive aspects as well? It seems some are so filled with negativity re everything that has to do with Roswell or comes out re Roswell that this negativity seriously seems to cloud their judgments, leaning towards an attitude of outright bias. I assume that doing real investigations -- instead of lazy armchair work -- involves taking risks and exploring every nook and cranny ... and as the saying goes, "you win some, you lose some"! Better luck next time! And always keep your spirits up! ;)
The Roswell incident is UFOlogy’s Holy Grail and the industry that has grown up around it never sleeps.
Alien Autopsy mark 2: coming to your internet browser soon! (credit: UFOevidence.org)
On Tuesday, 5 May the world may, or may not, be rocked to its foundations when the showmen behind the latest chapter in the Roswell saga unveil two colour slides that supposedly show “an unusual body in a glass case”.
The creature has a small thin body with a large head so, hey presto, it must be an extraterrestrial. And as experts have concluded the Kodachrome film was definitely exposed in 1947 it may – or may not – show one of the aliens whose flying saucer crashed in New Mexico and was recovered by the US government.
Up to present only tantalising glimpses of the images have been released, via a YouTube ‘teaser’, to fuel the bandwagon as it rolls towards Mexico City, where the images will be revealed in the presence of UFO pundit Jaime Maussan.
Internet flame wars are raging between those promoting the images as the fabled ‘smoking gun’ and skeptics who have annoyingly poked wide gaping holes in the story.
In his teaser sports writer Adam Dew, who appears to be the custodian of these images, says they were found inside a box containing 400 old slides that turned up in Sedona, Arizona during 1998.
The box may (or may not) have belonged to geologist Bernard Ray and his wife Hilda Blair Ray, who was an attorney and amateur pilot. The couple travelled widely and their photographs include images of celebrities such as Bing Crosby, Clark Gable and General Eisenhower at public events in the late 1940s.
But even if this is true there is absolutely no evidence that the Rays had any political or intelligence connections that would have allowed them access to Top Secret material. The one flimsy connection with Roswell is that Bernard was a president of the West Texas Archaeological Society and may have visited New Mexico in 1947-8.
Dew says that he is ‘not making any claims’ but then goes on to state the creature appears to be between 36-40 inches in length, its head is larger than its torso and it has ‘some unusual features’.
Sceptics have pointed out these features do not prove the creature is an extraterrestrial. It could equally show the body of a child with hydrocephalus or indeed the remains of an ancient mummy of the type stored in assorted museums across North America and Europe. Jose Antonio Caravaca, for example, says the ‘alien corpse’ has remarkable similarities to a child’s mummy discovered in Egypt in 1856 that is now at the Smithsonian in Washington.
But why let such awkward problems stand in the way of such a good story? Dew says that logic tells him ‘…it’s probably nothing but I just can’t shake the thought that maybe…just maybe…it’s something’.
Even so, some of the UFO industry’s biggest proponents have dismissed the slides as having nothing to do with Roswell. Stanton Friedman has said he’s going to observe the dog and pony show from a safe distance because he doesn’t “want to appear to add legitimacy by my presence in Mexico City”.
Robert Hastings has gone further, saying the slides are "….likely to become one of the most embarrassing missteps in a seven-decade-long effort by ufologists to gather and publicize data pointing to the reality of the UFO phenomenon and its probable extraterrestrial nature’.
5 May 2015, the day that some claim will change the world forever, is exactly 20 years since the hoaxed footage of the ‘Alien Autopsy’ was first shown to a hushed gathering of UFOlogists, journalists and others at the Museum of London.
The UFO myth just goes on repeating itself. I suspect the Roswell slides will be the Alien Autopsy II. As such the warning given to those fooled by Ray Santilli’s original autopsy footage in 1995 applies here: caveat emptor
US Navy invents bulletproof glass from clay that could revolutionise screens and lenses
The US Navy has invented a type of transparent material that is far more durable than glass and could revolutionise smartphone screens, laptop screens and camera lenses to make them more rugged.
The material, known as Spinel, is made from a special type of synthetic powdered clay and is bulletproof. The US Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) has been researching it for the past 10 years.
"Spinel is actually a mineral, it's magnesium aluminate," said Dr Jas Sanghera, who led the research. "The advantage is it's so much tougher, stronger, harder than glass. It provides better protection in more hostile environments — so it can withstand sand and rain erosion."
Spinel can also be moulded into virtually any shape you like and unlike conventional bulletproof glass, which is created by combining alternate layers of plastic sheeting and glass together, Spinel does not block the infrared wavelength of light.
This means the material is suitable for use on camera lenses, for example, a camera carried by an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), as well as smartphone screens or even for head-mounted face shields.
The hot press used by the researchers to create Spinel using sintering rather than a crucible(US Naval Research Laboratory)
NRL developed a new technique for making transparent Spinel using a process called sintering, which is commonly used in 3D printing, whereby a layer of crystal particles are pressed together. Since this is different from the way glass is made, if the Spinel is subjected to damage, it will only chip, as the crack is deflected by the hard crystals in the material.
The researchers found a press was more effective than using a crucible, as when materials are melted at a very high temperature to create the crystals, the molten material reacts with the crucible, causing materials with a large amount of defects.
The researchers hope the material can be applied to protect naval technology, such as the windows on its laser weapons, like its portable anti-drone laser system. Spinel would also work well as a transparent armour for military vehicles and even as a protection for sensors on space satellites.
The technology has been licensed to a company that has been able to make Spinel in larger quantities to suit any application and the NRL now plans to share its production method with the rest of the US defence industry.
"You could leave these out there for longer periods of time, go into environments that are harsher than what they're encountering now, and enable more capabilities," said Sanghera. "It's a game-changing technology."
Affordable Star Trek-like transparent aluminum could protect phones, windows, and lenses
Researchers at the US Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) have announced a breakthrough in the construction of spinel, also known as transparent aluminum. The substance is named after an iconic scene in Star Trek, in which Enterprise’s Chief Engineer hands over the chemical formula for an advanced 23rd-century building material to a manufacturing company in 1980s San Francisco.
Spinel — chemical formula MgAl2O4 is an extremely hard, durable substance with a Mohs Scale rating of 8.0. Sapphire glass, which we’ve previously discussed, has a Mohs rating of 9, just below diamond, with its rating of 10. Spinel’s refractive index can be lower than sapphire’s, depending on the exact characteristics of the material — a trait which could make it better than sapphire for screens.
“Spinel is actually a mineral, it’s magnesium aluminate,” says Dr. Jas Sanghera, who leads the research. “The advantage is it’s so much tougher, stronger, harder than glass. It provides better protection in more hostile environments — so it can withstand sand and rain erosion.” As a more durable material, a thinner layer of spinel can give better performance than glass. “For weight-sensitive platforms — UAVs [unmanned autonomous vehicles], head-mounted face shields — it’s a game-changing technology.”
Up until now, the research that’s gone into spinels has relied on small-scale manufacturing that could build pieces up to eight inches in diameter. That’s more than large enough for testing applications, but it’s not nearly large enough for many of the most useful test cases. The NRL team thinks transparent aluminum could have military applications, since spinel is transparent to infrared light. It could also be used in hostile environments like deserts and oceans, where the environmental conditions are extremely hard on modern glass.
According to the NRL, they’ve already worked with one unnamed company to extend manufacturing from 8-inch test wafers to 30-inch plates. They also discovered it’s possible to shape the material while it forms. This opens the door to using spinel as a shield for the leading edge of a plane wing or as part of a drone. Bulletproof glass is another possibility — current bulletproof glass is up to five inches thick and made from layers of both plastic and glass. Using spinel could drastically reduce the size and weight of the shielding while providing equivalent protection.
Obviously such announcements must be taken with a grain of salt. Sapphire glass was supposed to be the Next Big Thing, and while it’s true that you can buy at least one phone that sports a sapphire screen (a Kyocera model), sapphire hasn’t taken over the market the way some originally predicted. Instead, Apple’s sapphire supplier went out of business amid allegations of poor treatment and bad blood.
I wouldn’t look for spinel to be adopted by the smartphone industry in the near-term future. But if military and industrial applications prove themselves, we may see more corporations adopting the material for consumer devices in 5-10 years.
De Amerikaanse Navy heeft een transparant materiaal ontwikkeld dat veel sterker is dan glas en volgens ingewijden een revolutie zou kunnen betekenen voor de productie van beeldschermen voor laptops en de lenzen van camera's. Het materiaal heeft de naam Spinel meegekregen - dezelfde naam werd trouwens in een aflevering van Star Trek gebruikt om een chemische formule voor een onverwoestbaar bouwmateriaal aan te duiden- en wordt gemaakt uit synthetische klei.
Het Amerikaanse Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) zou een tiental jaar hebben gewerkt aan de ontwikkeling van het materiaal, dat onder meer bestand is tegen de erosie door wind of regen en bovendien kogelwerend blijkt te zijn.
"Spinel is niet alleen veel sterker dan glas en dus ook beter bestand tegen ruwe en vijandige omgevingen, maar kan bovendien ook in nagenoeg elk mogelijke vorm worden gegoten," merkt onderzoeksleider Jas Sanghera op.
"In tegenstelling tot kogelwerend glas, dat uit verschillende lagen materialen is opgebouwd, heeft Spinel geen impact op de inval van het licht. Daardoor is het materiaal ook geschikt voor een gebruik in onder meer camera-lenzen. Bovendien zou ook een belangrijke gewichtsbesparing kunnen worden gerealiseerd."
Het Amerikaanse leger ziet voor het materiaal vooral toepassingen waarbij Spinel zou kunnen worden gebruikt in laser-wapens of als bescherming voor de sensoren van ruimte-satellieten. Ook kan het materiaal worden toegepast om militaire voertuigen beter te beveiligen. (mah)
Are the "Roswell Slides" a 20th Anniversary Commemoration of the Santilli "Alien Autopsy" Hoax?
Is it possible that the now-famous Roswell Slides, set to be publicly unveiled very soon on Cinco de Mayo in Mexico City, are a hoax intended to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the infamous Ray Santilli Alien Autopsy hoax, possibly even by the same people who created the Santilli alien? The slides are to be publicly revealed in a big shindig in Mexico City on May 5, sponsored by the Mexican UFO fabulist Jaime Maussan, who has a long history of promoting bogus photos of UFOs and supposed alien creatures.This is the exact twentieth anniversary of when the Santilli hoax video was first publicly shown, a fact that has not gone unnoticed.
The 1995 "Alien Autopsy" video of Ray Santilli, now an admitted hoax, but one that made large sums ofmoney for its perpetrators.
This "innocent scenario" is beginning to look increasingly unlikely. On April 29 , the French skeptic Gilles Fernandez wrote a Blog entry titled "What if? The Roswell Slides Saga as a Social Experiment or a Hoax of some sort?" In it he pointed out some obvious problems in the scenario we are given by Dew and the other slide promoters. One of the slides in the collection, supposedly in a slide frame that was only used in the 1940s, shows an automobile that was not manufactured until 1958. And the photos, also from the 1940s that are supposed to show Bernard and Hilda Ray, show individuals who are obviously decades older than the Rays would have been at that time. Some slides in the collection are compared to genuine 1940s Kodachrome slides, and the differences are obvious. Fernandez asks whether it is possible that "the set of the 400 slides was put together from various sources, maybe even from eBuyers or physical markets, and a story was concocted, and the two slides were inserted?
UFO researcher George Wingfield has even stronger reservations. Back in 1995, he wrote a piece in the British publication Flying Saucer Review accusing three men of hoaxing the yet-unconfessed Santilli alien autopsy video: John Lundberg, Robert Irving, and, and Rod Dickinson, based on their involvement with Ray Santilli, their experience in producing special effects, and their reputation as Crop Circle makers. In that Flying Saucer review article Wingfield wrote that "The alien is, of course, called HILDA, which, in case you hadn't guessed, stands for Hoaxed Irving-Lundberg-Dickinson Alien." In 1995, RAY Santilli's hoaxed alien is satirically named HILDA - and now we have HILDA RAY. It seems as if the hoaxers may have signed their work, as an inside joke.
the “Roswell Alien Slides” were produced in a similar manner and supplied to targeted individuals likely to take the bait. If that’s right, the #1 suspects are John Lundberg and Rob Irving. Both of them were in California in December 2013 where they were commissioned to make a huge elaborate crop circle near Chualar, CA, for Nvidia who wanted to publicize their ultrafast Tegra microchip.
Apart from their work behind and in front of the camera, Lundberg and Dickinson were the experts who made foam latex dummies for a TV series on UK's Channel 4 back then called "Crapston Villas". If Lundberg and Irving have been up to their tricks again on this 20th anniversary of Santilli’s alien autopsy hoax, it seems very likely they may have been the creators of the “Roswell Alien Slides”.
John Lundberg is now well-known as one of the Crop Circle makers at circlemakers.org. He is also the director of the documentary film Mirage Men. Based on the book of the same name by Mark Pilkington, it is a look at the purported role of government-sponsored disinformation in shaping the UFO phenomenon. I wrote to Lundberg asking for his comments on this. He might have replied something like, "I had nothing to do with either the Santilli Alien, or the Roswell Slides." Instead, he chose to reply in poetic and evasive terms, which I read as acknowledging that he was involved in those matters, but was unwilling to say so publicly. But one never knows what is to be taken seriously when dealing with Mirage Men.
If the Roswell Slides are indeed a hoax as is here suggested, it is certainly the most elaborate and sophisticated hoax since, well, the Santilli Alien Autopsy of twenty years ago. It almost feels like an act of art vandalism to betray their secrets.
A prominent person in Roswell recently died. He was buried before a lot of people even knew he was gone.
Glenn Dennis said he was one of the witnesses of the 1947 UFO crash near Roswell. He passed away on Tuesday and was laid to rest sometime this week.
While Dennis’ family has chosen not to come forward with the details of his death, KOB took a look back at his legacy.
He was a founder of Roswell's famous UFO Museum.
His claim to fame? He claims someone called him about needing sealed caskets.
At the time, he was working at Ballard Funeral home. He also claims a nurse confided in him about seeing alien bodies.
Over the years, his stories have been featured in several books written about the UFO crash.
In early 1990, he and Lieutenant Walter Haut got together with realtor Max Littell to form the UFO Museum.
"Of course most of us thought to ourselves, 'why would you do that?'” said former Roswell Mayor Bill Owen. “How many people could ever have an interest in coming to where Roswell is to see a UFO museum?"
Owen was on city council when the museum was founded.
He says Dennis had a vision for the museum, believing it would be a success even when others doubted it.
"They certainly had the foresight and the dedication and the dream to make this museum happen, and of course they did. Roswell is the beneficiary of their early work and their early desire to see something made of this incident," said Owen.
Now the UFO Museum sees 180,000 visitors every year from around the world and has sparked the city’s tourism industry.
Owen says Dennis contributed to Roswell greatly and will be missed.
"[He] was a great person to have involved within our community and he will be greatly missed,” said Owen. “He certainly contributed many great things, many great ideas. He will be missed for sure."
One of the most documented and believable cases in UFOlogy is the experience of one woman’s abduction aboard a UFO.
Her name is Betty Andreasson Luca who is a devout Christian. During her abduction, she was taken before a being of intense light and love called "the One." This description of this being is remarkably similar to descriptions of the so-called "Being of Light" encountered in near-death experiences.
Her first abduction occurred during her childhood and culminated with an abduction experience that involved her whole family. Led by a number of teams of highly-credentialed investigators, her experience is one of the most thoroughly investigated cases ever reported in the annals of hypnotherapy.
The Abduction of Betty Andreasson Luca On the evening of January 25, 1967, Betty Andreasson was in her kitchen at South Ashburnham, Massachusetts. Her seven children, mother, and father were in the living room.
At about 6:35 p.m., the house lights suddenly blinked out for a moment. Then, a pulsating reddish-orange light shined in the kitchen window. Betty calmed the frightened children while her father rushed to look out the kitchen window. He saw a group of strange-looking small creatures approaching with a hopping motion. Five small humanoid creatures entered the house, passing right through the wooden door.
Betty’s family was immediately placed into suspended animation. One creature went over to her father. The leader of the other four established telepathic communication with Betty.
The leader was about five feet tall.
The others were about four feet tall. All had large pear-shaped heads, wide catlike wraparound eyes, and diminutive ears and noses. Their mouths were immobile slits that reminded Betty of scar lines. Each wore a coverall blue uniform adorned with a Sam Browne-type belt. An insignia of a bird was affixed to their sleeves. Their hands had three digits. (Later, on the craft, they were gloved.) They wore boot-like attire on their feet. They floated rather than walked.
Betty’s initial fright was immediately calmed by an overpowering sense of friendship. When she displayed concern for her family’s welfare, the creatures temporarily released her eleven-year-old daughter, Becky, from this strange state of unawareness to assure Betty that she was all right.
Then Betty was taken outside and brought on board a small craft resting on the side of a hill that sloped into the back yard. The machine was about twenty feet in diameter. It looked like two saucers, one inverted upon the other, with a small superstructure on top. The small craft accelerated and apparently merged with a larger parent craft, in which Betty was subjected to the effects of strange equipment and a physical examination. Then she was taken to an alien place and given a bizarre object lesson that caused her to undergo a painful yet ecstatic religious-like experience.
Later that night, a 10:40 p.m., Betty was returned home by two of her alien captors. At home, she found her family still in a state of suspended animation. One being had stayed behind to watch over them during her absence. Then the beings put the family - still under some type of mind control - to bed, and the aliens left.
Several times, the aliens had told Betty that certain things had been locked in her mind. She was instructed to forget them and her UFO experience until the appointed time. She consciously remembered only a fraction of the strange encounter; the power failure, the colored light flashing through the window, and the aliens entering the house.
Betty, a devout Christian, interpreted the creatures as religious or angelic in nature. The subject of UFOs was largely unknown to her. Her education had been limited to ten years of schooling, her basic interests included family, church, and community-related activities. Not until much later did she think of her experience as a possible UFO encounter.
In 1975, Betty responded to a local newspaper story about UFO researcher Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who was soliciting personal UFO experience information from the public. Betty’s letter contained such few data, however, that it was filed and forgotten until an investigation in January 1977.
The investigating team consisted of:
a solar physicist
an electronics engineer
an aerospace engineer
a telecommunications specialist
a UFO investigator
They employed the services of a professional hypnotist and a medical doctor trained in psychiatry. During a twelve-month investigation, they conducted an extensive character-reference check, two lie-detector tests, a psychiatric interview, and fourteen lengthy hypnotic regression sessions. Under hypnosis, Betty and her daughter relived a consistent, detailed UFO experience with genuine physiological reactions.
Their three-volume, 528-page report led to the conclusion that the witnesses were reliable and sane individuals who sincerely believed the experience had really occurred.
Her Experience With the Being of Light The following are the exact transcripts from her hypnotic regression when Betty was regressed to her childhood during one of her first abduction experiences and her encounter with the One.
Betty’s words are in blue. The hypnotherapist’s words are in black.
We’re coming up to this wall of glass and a big, big, big, big, big door. It’s made out of glass. Does it have hinges? No. It is so big and there is - I can’t explain it. It is door after door after door after door. He (the alien leading her) is stopping there and telling me to stop. I’m just stopping there. He says: "Now you shall enter the door to see the One." And he says, "Fear not."
[Then Betty appeared to undergo an out-of-body experience!]
And I’m standing there and I’m coming out of myself! There’s two of me! There’s two of me there! Are you looking at yourself? Uh, huh. Okay. Do you see the One yet? The One? No. Okay, go on. I’m coming up to the door, and the little person is saying: "Now you shall enter the Great Door and see the glory of the One." And I’m standing face to face with that door.
[Betty now stood before the strange door. Again she described its appearance and her out-of-body experience.]
There’s a big door there, and it is big, but it is strange. It is like deeper and deeper and deeper. And it’s bright, really bright. And I have to stand before the door. But, before that, I came out of myself. I was just standing over there, and I was standing over here. There were two of me, but that one over there was stiff. Have you tried to talk to your other self? That won’t work, because I’m over here, and that one is over there. She looks exactly like you? Is she making motions to show you she is alive, like breathing, moving her arms? No. Would you say she looks like a wax museum piece or something? No, it looks just like me. All right, go on. I was told to come forward. I went in the door, and it’s very bright. I can’t take you any further. Why? Because. What do you mean, because? I can’t take you past this door. Okay, I’ll tell you what. You go past that door alone then for a few minutes, okay?
[Time and again, the hypnotist tried in different ways to induce Betty to tell him what was behind the door - all in vain.]
Sometime maybe, if you change your mind, would you tell me? I can’t change my mind. It is set. What would happen to you if you did tell me? I can’t tell you. I’m sorry. Okay, let’s proceed to the first thing you can tell me. Fair enough? Oh!
[Betty’s face glows with joy]
What’s happening now? I’m coming out of that door, and it was wonderful! Did the One say something exciting? I can’t tell you. I’m sorry. Would you say that the One was God? Do you really know what God is? I don’t know. I was hoping that you had seen him and could therefore tell me. I can’t tell you about that. Okay, let’s proceed. What’s happening now? You just came out of the room, and you feel great. I come out of the door, and there is a tall white-haired man standing there and he’s got on a long nightgown.
[The next session took place on May 15, 1980. Determined to find out what lay behind the Great Door, the hypnotist again brought Betty back in time to where she was standing before it.]
Where are you? I’m before this huge great big door. It’s glass. Layers and layers of glass. What are you standing on? Glass. Let me ask you now: You’re going to see the One now, right? Yeah. Why are you going to see the One? Because it is time for me, they said, for me to go home to see the One. All right, in other words, does this imply that the One is someone that you have seen before? I don’t remember. Okay. Do you know why it is time to see the One? Why haven’t you asked questions? They haven’t been there very often. Those little people haven’t been there very much for me to ask. Yeah, but they are asking you to do a lot of things, shall we say. I know. But, I’m in their place. I can’t do anything. Okay. In a moment you’re going to see the One, right? We don’t want to waste the experience. We want to get the most out of it. So when you see the One, I want you to ask yourself: "What am I getting out of this? Why am I here? And, what will this mean to me later on in my life?" It’s like any big experience a person is allowed to have. Okay? I want you to progress to where the door is open and you are seeing the One. Oh!
[At that very moment, an indescribable smile came over Betty’s face. The only adjective that the investigators could think of to describe it is rapturous. This expression of pure, unrestricted happiness remained on Betty’s face as the hypnotist continued to question her.]
You seem happy. Why are you so happy? It’s just - ah, I just, I can’t tell you about it. All right. I know you can’t tell me, but I want you to do a few things. I want you to ask yourself why you are being shown that which you are being shown. In other words, you weren’t given this trip just for a free ride, so to speak. They want you to see what you are seeing. Does that make sense? Yes. All right. Now that you’re there, ask yourself: "What am I getting out of this? Why am I here? What am I supposed to think about after I leave here?" Oh, it matters not what I get from it. What do you mean? It’s - words cannot explain it. It’s wonderful. It’s for everybody. I just can’t tell you this. You can’t? Okay, why can’t you? For one thing, it’s too overwhelming and it is - it is indescribable. I just can’t tell you. Besides it’s just impossible for me to tell you. All right. Are you capable, when looking around you, to tell yourself? I see it. Right. That which you can see, you have a grasp of even if you don’t understand it. I understand it. I’m sorry. I’m just sorry. I wish I could share it with you. Were you told not to share it with me? It is like even if I was able to speak it, I wouldn’t be able to speak it. I can’t. I’m sorry. Were you specifically told not to speak it? Partly, yeah. How was it expressed to you? I can’t tell you those things. I’m sorry. All right. Can we let the beings speak through you? Suppose you just relax, and I’ll put my hand on your shoulder and with each number you will go deeper and deeper. When I reach three, you will just relax and allow the beings to speak through you. One, two, three.
[Betty began speaking in a strange tongue.]
Okay, Betty, can you explain to me so that I could understand what you have just said?
[Betty begins crying]
Father loves the world so very much. Yes? And so many reject him. Uh huh, okay. You said a lot of words. Can you explain more of what you said? They will be felt by those who believe and have faith. They will feel the love radiating from them. Okay, where are you now? I’m where there is light. And what do you see? I cannot tell you this. Okay, that’s all right. Let me ask you. Do you feel much love, the same love, or any different degree of love now than you have before? It’s a greater love. Okay. When will I understand all of the words that the being said through you? When you allow the Spirit to come upon you and you are filled with that love. Do you understand all the words that you have said? I understand them, but they will not come forth. Okay, I’m trying to understand. I’m not trying to ask you to divulge anything, all right? You understand them, but you can’t express them? They’re in my heart. More like a feeling than a concept? They’re in my heart, in my mind, in my body. Okay, could you explain this to your children? What children?
[During this hypnotic session, Betty was regressed to a childhood experience when she was single with no children.]
If you have children someday. The words that you spoke, while they had a message of love in them, did they also have a warning? Yes. Those that do not have love have nothing. Love is the answer.
[Again the hypnotist failed to elicit the information that he sought regarding what Betty had experienced while behind the Great Door. With endless patience, he tried yet again.]
Okay. You’ve seen the One. Do you feel different about anything now than you did before? Everything is so wonderful! Is there anybody that you don’t like? No. There are some people, shall we say, that aren’t as nice as other people, right? No, everybody is nice. They are just growing, that’s all. If one doesn’t understand another one, they are just growing, that’s all. Okay, just relax. You’ve been to see the One and now everything is a little nicer, right? I understand that everything is one. What do you mean? Everything fits together. Everything is one. It’s beautiful! No matter what it is!
Triangular-Shaped UFO Sighted at the Nellis AFB Nuclear Weapons Storage Area
Triangular-Shaped UFO Sighted at the Nellis AFB Nuclear Weapons Storage Area
Credit: Las Vegas Review-Journal
By Robert Hastings www.theufochronicles.com 4-22-15
Christopher Cabrera recently told me, “I was a Security Forces member in the United States Air Force from 1998 to 2002. Beginning in October 1998, I was stationed at Nellis AFB, Nevada, where I witnessed two separate, strange and unexplainable incidents while on duty.” He continued:
At the time I arrived in [Las] Vegas, Nellis’ ‘Area 2’ served as one of two main Air Force nuclear weapons depots in the United States and ranked 4th in the world, in terms of the number of stored nuclear warheads. The 896th Munitions Squadron, a unit of the USAF Materiel Command, oversaw them in conjunction with the Air Combat Command.
Along the perimeter of Area 2 were numbered markers which were assigned to security teams known as ‘Whiskey’ posts/patrols. As a perimeter security team/patrol we were tasked to cover approximately 20 markers per team. Most teams/patrols were composed of two members who drove pickup trucks while other teams/patrols had up to fourmembers and drove Humvees.
The first incident I witnessed occurred in late 1998, while working with a partner on the Southwest perimeter patrol. I worked the 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. shift. It was winter and by 5:45 p.m. it was completely dark.
Approximately 15 minutes before leaving my shift for the day, my patrol met up with the Northeast patrol at one of the markers to chat, before being relieved of our duties. Our trucks were parked facing southeast, when all four of us noticed three extremely bright lights blinking sequentially in a vertical, triangular formation. The event lasted about 10 seconds and the lights were so bright that it felt like it was daytime again.
The first light to shine was at the apex of the formation, then the second light, which was at the bottom left of the formation, and then the third light, at the bottom right. They did this pattern at least twice, fading in-and-out rather than just blinking on-and-off. The color was a light amber color when fully lit and a dark amber color right before it disappeared.
The bottom two lights were about 100 feet off the ground; all four of us had to look up slightly to see them. They seemed to be about a quarter-mile from us, or maybe a little closer. They didn’t seem like separate objects but lights affixed to one solid object. No clear outline could be seen but this thing blocked out the stars behind it. There was no sound at all; it was eerily quiet.
Once the light display was over, we all were asking one another if we really had seen what we saw and, most importantly, what was it? Next, we immediately notified our Control Center of the incident, as it was our duty to do so.
Even though it was our shift-change, Control put a halt to any patrol movements inside the Area and sent an outer perimeter team, called an Oscar patrol, to investigate. Another patrol with a senior member decided to assist the Oscar patrol in the investigation. The process took about 30 minutes and then the shift-change was allowed to proceed. I, along with my partner and the other patrol who witnessed the incident, were called into our Flight Chief’s office to discuss what had happened. When we entered the lobby outside of his office, were told to fill out an incident form. We were then asked general questions by our Flight Chief and then separately pulled into the his office and asked to tell our story in detail. During my conversation with him, I never got the impression that he didn’t believe me.
Right before he allowed us to head home for the night, he strictly instructed us that the incident never happened said that we were never to talk amongst ourselves or to anyone else about the incident. We were threatened with dishonorable discharge, among other things, which was very confusing and angered me.
The next day, as part of our morning meeting, the Flight Chief addressed the whole staff, saying that there was no incident the night before and that no one should talk about it or they would face stiff penalties. As instructed, my co-workers and I never talked about it.
I never found out what happened to our incident reports and never found out if it was further investigated. I continued to work in the Area as a sentry foranother five months until I was promoted to working at the Armory, within Area 2, for three more years. Although I didn’t experience any other incidents during the rest of my time at Area 2, others did report strange lights, disembodied voices, shadow-like humanoids and strange claw marks on certain surfaces.
At this point, I told Cabrera that I had heard about sightings of “shadow people” at Area 2 from another former Security Policeman (SP) who had worked there from 2002 to 2008. This individual gave me a detailed written statement and allowed me to record a telephone interview with him in 2010. I found him to be credible, cautious in his assessments, but nevertheless unequivocal in his remarks to me. In one email he wrote, “My experiences involved:
● Unexplained lights in the sky to include lights that hover, move in irregular patterns, appear for entire nights and disappear the next, and a unique incident involving a small light at very close proximity that caused a chase by security personnel
● Inexplicable penetration alarms with odd phenomena at the scene to include metallic taste in the air, humanoid sightings, extreme temperature differences and loss of radio communications
● Sudden commercial power failures and failure of back-up generators
● Sightings of humanoids, shadowy figures, foot chases, and a weapons-free incident
● Animal mutilations
● Harassment of security personnel [by superiors who mandated strict secrecy]
Although he had provided me with his DD-214 service record, and told me that I could publish his statements, this individual later became concerned about possible official repercussions relating to his disclosures and ceased communications with me. Consequently, I will not identify him here.
In any case, this former SP told me that one night in 2004, he had had a humanoid sighting himself, of a silhouette-like, 8- or 9-foot-tall figure that outran three teams of SPs who were sent to investigate a mysterious light seen in a distant corner of the weapons storage compound.
Upon arriving at the location in vehicles, no light could be found. However, seconds later, one SP spotted the towering figure, visible against the moon-lit sky, which quickly turned and ran. After disappearing over a rise in the terrain, with six Security Policemen in hot pursuit, the unknown intruder seemingly vanished into thin air.
Upon relating this testimony to Cabrera, he seemed relieved that someone else had reported such an encounter, telling me that he was concerned that I would think him a liar or mentally unbalanced.
He then mentioned a former colleague, who had arrived at Area 2 just before the end of his tour of duty there, had also reported incidents involving the so-called shadow people. I later spoke with this person by telephone, who described his sightings—two, in daylight—but he ultimately decided not elaborate in writing or on audiotape. Regardless, I consider his comments to me to be credible and it was clear that he had been deeply affected by the encounters.
One might be tempted to dismiss these humanoid sightings as ridiculous “ghost stories” told by young, bored military guards to pass the time. However, given their Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) status—whereby a Security Policeman could be immediately reassigned away from guarding nuclear weapons if his mental stability were in question—these guys had absolutely no reason to go around spreading UFO and humanoid sighting stories. Nevertheless, they did, sometimes informing their superiors, whereupon they were told never to discuss the incidents again, rather than being reassigned.
In any case, Cabrera then continued with his narrative:
I was supposed to be discharged in late July 2002 but was held at Nellis for two more months. During this time, I did go on base Police patrols, worked on the flight line and at the various entry control points. Every now and then, we were tasked and sent to work at certain off-site stations and other bases.
One of the places we were sent to was called Indian Springs, now known as Creech Air Force Base. We were there to fill-in at the entry control points at the front gate and another entrance. Indian Springs was located approximately 30 miles from Nellis, but it took over an hour to get there while traversing the barren desert landscape.
I found out during my time at Main Base, that Indian Springs was primarily a practice spot for the Air Force Thunderbirds. There was also a rumor that it was also the testing ground for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Drone fighters. There were rumblings as well, of UFOs and humanoid beings that were spotted there.
I had worked Indian Springs a handful of times and always found it to be very unusual. There were never many people there and the activity was extremely low. It was like a ghost town sometimes. I never stayed late when working there so I never experienced what the nightlife was like.
One morning in late September 2002, I was told that I was to go there and fill-in at their entry control point for one shift, which was to begin at 7 a.m. and end at around 5 p.m. I was to be partnered with another individual but when I arrived, there was no partner so I proceeded to work my schedule as planned, but on my own.
At 5 p.m. I was eagerly anticipating the end of my shift but no one showed up to relieve me. I called Nellis to get an update and was told that there was a slight delay and that I would be picked up soon. About 45 minutes later, I decided to step out of the ECP—entry control point—and get some air. It was dark by this time and the environment seemed different to me; almost foreign.
I looked at the night sky. It was a cold, crisp night with tons of stars. For some reason, I felt compelled to look behind me towards the base. When I did, an amber/red orb caught my eye as it hovered motionless over Indian Springs. I stared at it for about two minutes when, suddenly, a red beam shot out from the orb and hit the side of the nearest mountain. The beam lasted about one minute and I noticed what looked like molten rock dripping from the mountain. The beam abruptly ceased and the orb just disappeared. A few seconds later, the molten effect on the mountain also dissipated. This incident took me aback and I was really eager to leave the base. Finally, I was relieved of duty, about 20 minutes later, and left Indian Springs for the last time.
Learning what could happen from my 1998 incident, I never told anyone. My fear was that I would be dishonorably discharged and/or be dropped in rank and ridiculed the rest of my time in the Air Force. These two incidents have changed my life profoundly and I stand by what I’ve stated.
Chile UFO: Government confirm mysterious object is NOT ‘made by man’
Chile UFO: Government confirm mysterious object is NOT ‘made by man’
Case File Information
Date of Event / Case File: 04/15/2013
Case File Details
On April 16, 2015, the following was published by The Mirror:
Chile UFO: Government confirm mysterious object is NOT ‘made by man’
Authorities revealed that they do not recognize the strange object which was captured hovering in the skies
A UFO that was sighted in Chile is ‘not a known object made by man’, according to the country’s government.
Officials released the footage after completing a thorough investigation and have announced in a report that the mysterious object is not one they recognize.
They confirmed that the silver disc seen in the clip was approximately 10 metres in diameter and performed with vertical and horizontal movements that no other aircraft can do, according to Chilean media reports.
Scientists at the Centre for the Study of Anomalous Ariel Phenomena (CEFAA) confirmed: “It is not any weather phenomenon or any other known object made by man.”
The footage was originally shot in April 2013 by miners who were working at the Collahuasi copper mine in north Chile.
Initially, they chose to keep the clip under wraps, for fear of being ridiculed, but later showed the clip to one of their bosses who insisted on sending copies to the CEFAA in February 2014.
The witnesses, who have chosen to remain anonymous, revealed that the object hovered in the sky for over an hour, and did not make any sound.
According to reports published in July 2014, the Chilean Meterological Office confirmed that the sky was clear on the day in question and now lenticular clouds (saucer shaped cloud formations) were recorded.
José Lay, director of international affairs at CEFAA also excluded the possibility that the UFO could be a drone.
“People in that area are well aware of the existence of drones.
“Fishing companies use drones and [they] make much noise. This was definitely not a drone.”
Officials also ruled out experimental aircraft, weather balloons, or other military drills that could explain the incident.
Spotted: The mysterious object was seen by workers above a Chilean mine
Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), and International Air Safety Reports
By Ted Roe Executive Director NARCAP.org
Over the past twenty years several nations and US government agencies have released files on unidentified aerial phenomena, UAP, reports and investigations. Nearly all of these case files contain reports of aviation related observations and aviation safety related incidents involving unusual lights or objects, UAP. These reports often involve commercial and military pilots, air crews and air traffic controllers dealing with UAP observations and incidents during the conduct of their duties as career professionals.
While there have been few comments regarding the source or causes of these reports it is apparent that there are many commonalities in these reports that should be examined more closely. However, there has been no coordinated effort at the official level to compare these reports and assess them for commonalities and “profiles” or for aviation safety.
Data regarding aviation related UAP observations and incidents flows away from the aviation system and is not examined for safety factors by US aviation authorities, the NTSB, etc. In fact, the FAA refers pilots and air traffic controllers that want to make a UAP or “UFO” report to contact civilian UFO research groups and private businesses. These organizations have not published a single study nor demonstrated the slightest concern for the matter of UAP and aviation safety.
The French Government has maintained a nearly constant official vigilance with respect to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena since the mid1960s. The current agency addressing UAP observations and incidents, GEIPAN – Groupe d’Études et d’Informations sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés (unidentified aerospace phenomenon research and information group), is located in the French Space Agency CNES – Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (National Center for Space Studies). This organization collects reports from across French bureaucracy including the French aviation authority and their files reflect aviation related observations and aviation safety related incidents involving UAP.
Many French officials including GEIPAN members and former members participated in the COMETA report which was prepared as an independent study through IDHN. This report contains several aviation related UAP reports that share consistent commonalities with those reported in other parts of the world as well as a strong recommendation that the world look more closely at UAP manifestations.
In the late 1980s-1990s, in response to their own UAP cases, the governments of Chile, Peru and Uruguay established official UAP research teams and their case files also reflect aviation related observations and aviation safety related incidents involving UAP.
Dr. Richard. F. Haines, NARCAP (National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena) Chief Scientist, has collected over 3400 cases of aviation-related observations and incidents involving unidentified aerial phenomena, UAP.
NARCAP.org was founded in 1999 specifically to investigate and document aviation-safety related UAP reports for the benefit of aviation safety and global aviation. Reports are engaged confidentially to protect the reputation of the reporter. NARCAP has a staff of about 50 specialists that can address investigations, analysis, publications and activism related to UAP and aviation safety. NARCAP has published numerous reports and studies.
In 2004, Mexican NARCAP Research Associates Carlos Guzman and Alfonse Salazar published a book documenting many examples of aviation related observations and safety related incidents involving UAP over Mexico – Ovnis y la Aviación Mexicana.
In 2006 the British Government, the UK Ministry of Defense, released the “Condign” report, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in the UK Air Defence Region (UKMOD), which states rather bluntly “that UAP exist is indisputable… and they (UAP) are probably a threat to safe aviation.” Airprox reports released by the UK CAA, Civil Aviation Authority, clearly reveal that some UAP cases do indeed involve aviation safety factors and that many UK UAP cases share commonalities with those reported in other countries. (CAA DOC LINK)
Since then NARCAP has published several papers on its website addressing UAP and aviation safety factors in other nations, prepared by NARCAP staff and efforts of merit.
In 2010 NARCAP published Project Sphere, an international effort to examine aviation related observations and incidents involving UAP that present as spherical lights or objects. This report includes reports from six countries including the USA (click here) regarding safety related incidents involving spherical UAP.
In 2013 the Government of Peru reopened its own UAP investigations team through its military, the Office for the Investigation of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena – OIFAA.
In response to UAP cases involving German and EU pilots NARCAP – Germany branch has been established.
In July of 2014 NARCAP Science Chief Dr. Richard Haines and NARCAP Executive Advisory Committee member Dr. Jacques Vallee presented at a closed workshop hosted by the official French UAP research team, CNES-GEIPAN, regarding investigation techniques for examining alleged aviation related UAP encounters and developing a research strategy for engaging UAP research. CAIPAN Workshop.
Over the past 15 years NARCAP.org has received numerous specific international reports from many different nations that apparently involve safety factors and UAP. These include claims of near midair collisions, loss of separation, crew distraction, failed radar detections, incursions or manifestations inside of restricted or controlled air space, etc.
As the conversation continues to evolve the number of reports, historical and current, is increasing. While NARCAP’s investigations and research mandate applies to US aircraft and crews we acknowledge and encourage our international staff, partners and efforts of merit as they document and report their own cases involving UAP and aviation safety.
Beste bezoeker, Heb je zelf al ooit een vreemde waarneming gedaan, laat dit dan even weten via email aan email@example.com of aan www.ufo.be. Deze onderzoekers behandelen jouw melding in volledige anonimiteit en met alle respect voor jouw privacy. Ze zijn kritisch, objectief maar open minded aangelegd en zullen jou steeds een verklaring geven voor jouw waarneming! DUS AARZEL NIET, ALS JE EEN ANTWOORD OP JOUW VRAGEN WENST, CONTACTEER OLIVER. BIJ VOORBAAT DANK...
Druk op onderstaande knop om een berichtje achter te laten in mijn gastenboek
Alvast bedankt voor al jouw bezoekjes en jouw reacties. Nog een prettige dag verder!!!
Ik ben Pieter, en gebruik soms ook wel de schuilnaam Peter2011.
Ik ben een man en woon in Linter (België) en mijn beroep is Ik ben op rust..
Ik ben geboren op 18/10/1950 en ben nu dus 67 jaar jong.
Mijn hobby's zijn: Ufologie en andere esoterische onderwerpen.
Op deze blog vind je onder artikels, werk van mezelf. Mijn dank gaat ook naar André, Ingrid, Oliver, Paul, Vincent, Georges Filer en MUFON voor de bijdragen voor de verschillende categorieën...
Veel leesplezier en geef je mening over deze blog.